Achieving contextual ambidexterity in R&D organizations: a management control system approach

Research on how managers control R&D activities has tended to focus on the performance measurement systems used to exploit existing knowledge and capabilities. This focus has been at the expense of how broader forms of management control could be used to enable R&D contextual ambidexterity, the capacity to attain appropriate levels of exploitation and exploration behaviors in the same R&D organizational unit. In this paper, we develop a conceptual framework for understanding how different types of control system, guided by different R&D strategic goals, can be used to induce and balance both exploitation and exploration. We illustrate the elements of this framework and their relations using data from biotechnology firms, and then discuss how the framework provides a basis to empirically examine a number of important control relationships and phenomena.     

Performance measurement in R&D: exploring the interplay between measurement objectives, dimensions of performance and contextual factors

Measuring research and development (R&D) performance has become a fundamental concern for R&D managers and executives in the last decades. As a result, the issue has been extensively debated in innovation and R&D management literature. The paper contributes to this growing body of knowledge, adopting a systemic and contextual perspective to look into the problem of measuring R&D performance. In particular, it explores the interplay between measurement objectives, performance dimensions and contextual factors in the design of a performance measurement system (PMS) for R&D activities. The paper relies on a multiple case study analysis that involved 15 Italian technology-intensive firms. The results indicate that firms measure R&D performance with different purposes, i.e. motivate researchers and engineers, monitor the progress of activities, evaluate the profitability of R&D projects, favour coordination and communication and stimulate organisational learning. These objectives are pursued in clusters, and the importance firms attach to each cluster is influenced by the context (type of R&D, industry belonging, size) in which measurement takes place. Furthermore, a firm's choice to measure R&D performance along a particular perspective (i.e. financial, customer, business processes or innovation and learning) is influenced by the classes of objectives (diagnostic, motivational or interactive) that are given higher priority. The implications of these results for R&D managers and scholars are discussed in the paper.     

Economic compensation compositions preferred by R&D personnel of different R&D types and intrinsic values

In order to enhance R&D performance, R&D managers make sure that R&D personnel are satisfied with their compensation, both economic and non–economic . An R&D compensation scheme would consist of many complex factors. In this research, we focus on 'compensation composition' as such a factor for the economic compensation system, i.e., the mix of compensation components such as team (or organization) performance based, individual (R&D personnel) performance based, and fixed (seniority based) portion of economic compensation. As part of non–economic compensation, intrinsic values such as social status and self–actualization perceived by the R&D personnel are influencing their level of satisfaction with the entire compensation system. Another critical factor we consider here is the difference in R&D types: there are three R&D types, i.e., basic, applied , and commercial R&D . We put forth two sets of propositions. First, there is statistically significant correlation among R&D personnel's job satisfaction, performance measurement satisfaction, and compensation satisfaction. Second, depending on the types of their R&D activities, R&D personnel prefer a certain composition of economic compensation. In addition, the relationships are mediated by whether the R&D personnel feel intrinsic values of their jobs.     

Profitability Goals,Control Goals,and the R&D Investment Decisions of Family and Nonfamily Firms

Research and development (R&D) investments can help build sustainable competitive advantages and improve firm performance. Nevertheless, managers also acknowledge the difficulties associated with managing R&D and the low chances of success of innovation programs. For this reason, researchers have long been interested in understanding how managers make R&D investment decisions. Research grounded in the behavioral theory of the firm suggests that a primary driver of R&D investment decisions is profitability: when profitability goals have not been met, managers are more likely to initiate a problemistic search through increasing R&D investments. While emphasizing profitability goals and their relationship with R&D investments, prior research largely downplays the role of goals beyond profitability that exist in a significant number of firms (family firms) that are owned and managed by family members whose primary concern is preserving their control over the organization. Research indicates that these family‐centered noneconomic goals lead family managers to minimize R&D investments and that the coexistence of multiple goals produces highly variable R&D investment behavior. Yet, how family‐centered goals for control and profitability enter decision‐making in family firms is not fully understood. In this study, we propose that family managers form distinctive reference points that capture supplier bargaining power and are used to evaluate the degree of external obstruction to their managerial control. The empirical analysis of panel data on 431 private Spanish manufacturing firms observed over the period 2000–2006 shows that the importance of profitability and control goals follows a sequential logic in family firms, such that family firms react more strongly to increasing supplier bargaining power when their profitability reference points have been reached. This study extends current understanding of the distinctive organizational processes engendered by family management in business organizations leading to new research opportunities at the intersection of the innovation management and family business literatures.     

Exploring the differences in performance measurement between research and development: evidence from a multiple case study

Researchers and practitioners have recently paid great attention to research and development (R&D) performance measurement, although it is acknowledged to be a very challenging task because of R&D intrinsic uncertainty and complexity levels. In this paper, the problem of designing a performance measurement system (PMS) for R&D activities is addressed; specifically, we investigate if and how the design of the PMS is influenced by the type of activity it is applied to, namely Basic and Applied Research or new product development (NPD). We first develop a theoretical framework that comprises the main constitutive elements of a PMS for R&D. Then the framework is used for supporting a multiple case study analysis involving eight Italian technology-intensive firms. The research results show that the criteria for designing the constitutive elements of the PMS are radically different in Basic and Applied Research and NPD. The reasons behind the observed dissimilarities in the design criteria are widely discussed in the paper, as well as their implications for R&D managers.     

Monitoring R&D project costs against pre-specified targets

The monitoring and interpretation of costs incurred during a project against pre-specified targets is the most common task which R&D managers at all levels have to undertake. Graphical interpretation of such cost and target figures can provide useful feedback as to financial performance.
Spreadsheets provide an ideal environment for the manipulation of figures and production of graphs and, although not widely used, the programming facilities incorporated in such packages also allow for menu driven systems to be developed which can be operated without a knowledge of the spreadsheet's command structure thus greatly widening their area of application.
This article describes some of the elements of such a system and details its ability to automatically produce four specified graphs taken from accountancy, statistical process control and forecasting which have been shown to offer a valuable insight into cost control generally and, it is proposed, within R&D projects in particular.     

A Closer Look at Cross‐functional R&D Cooperation for Innovativeness: Innovation‐oriented Leadership and Human Resource Practices as Driving Forces

Because cross‐functional research and development (R&D) cooperation appears to drive innovation, many firms have invested considerably in it. However, despite substantial efforts to improve information and communication infrastructures or to bring departments in closer proximity with one another, structural investments often fail to produce the desired positive impact on cross‐functional R&D cooperation. This failure may arise because firms undertaking these structural investments do not manage their employees adequately. Extant research acknowledges the importance of motivating and enabling members of the R&D function to cooperate with other functions. Yet empirical studies investigating the relative importance of leadership and different human resource (HR) practices for enhancing cross‐functional R&D cooperation are scarce. Drawing on the resource‐based view and organizational support theory, this study investigates how innovation‐oriented leadership and HR practices might support members of the R&D function and encourage cross‐functional R&D cooperation, which enhances product program innovativeness. Specifically, members of the R&D function who are supported in their innovation efforts through innovation‐oriented leadership and HR practices should reciprocate for the support they receive by intensifying their cross‐functional cooperation to achieve greater product program innovativeness. Relying on multi‐informant data from 125 firms with assessments from marketing and R&D managers, this study shows that innovation‐oriented leadership and HR practices have different effects on cross‐functional R&D cooperation. A structural equation modeling‐based analysis of the hypothesized relationships reveals that innovation‐oriented leadership, rewards, and training and development have considerable positive effects. In contrast, recruitment does not drive cross‐functional R&D cooperation. Because firms usually operate in dynamic markets, and increasingly acquire relevant information from customers when generating innovations, this study also considers market‐related dynamism and customer integration as important contingency factors. For firms facing market‐related dynamism and those relying on customer integration, leadership and training and development are particularly effective for enhancing cross‐functional R&D cooperation. By integrating two theoretical perspectives, this study not only advances knowledge on the antecedents of cross‐functional R&D cooperation, but also helps explain differences in their relative effectiveness. Furthermore, it both adds to the discussion of whether monetary rewards are appropriate means to foster innovation and challenges existing assumptions about the role of recruiting for innovation.     

Managing foreign R&D laboratories in China

This paper focuses on the management of R&D units established by foreign companies in China, investigating R&D missions, site build-up, integration with the parent organization, and overall performance measurement. The research is based on 37 qualitative expert interviews with local R&D directors and managers conducted between 2001 and 2004, using a semi-structured research questionnaire, and semi-quantitative research done on 199 foreign R&D labs in China. Cultural influences on R&D management, location advantages, expatriate involvement, and organizational evolution of local laboratories are discussed. We find that foreign R&D laboratories in China are not only important vehicles for local market development but also increasingly important sources of locally developed technology.     

Utilizing the balanced scorecard for R&D performance measurement

R&D programs are critical for many firms to achieve and sustain competitive advantage. Yet, measuring R&D performance over time can be quite complex due to inherent uncertainty. The paper responds to calls in the R&D literature to explore integrated performance measurement systems that capture financial and nonfinancial performance. We integrate the Stage-Gate approach to R&D management with the Balanced Scorecard to present a framework to show how firms can link resource commitments to these activities and the firm's strategic objectives. In this paper, we provide specific examples of how firms can apply this integrated performance measurement system to the R&D function.     

Networks and the Decision to Persist with Underperforming R&D Projects

Drawing on aspiration level theory and the networks literature, this paper develops a model toward decision makers' persistence with underperforming R&D projects based on the perceived properties of their personal network. The assumption is that positive feedback from network partners motivates persistence, and that this effect is multiplied when the decision makers' network is larger and denser, when network ties are predominantly strong, and when communication frequency within the network is high. The model is tested by a field experiment and conjoint methodology. Analysis of 1632 persistence decisions nested within 51 scientists responsible for R&D projects reveals that more positive feedback enhances persistence of underperforming R&D projects, and that this effect becomes stronger with increasing network size, network density, and communication frequency. These findings extend the project management literature by focusing on the social environment of the decision maker as one so far neglected factor in empirical studies on persistence decisions. Moreover, this study is among the first to investigate contingency relationships between feedback received from network partners and network structure. Finally, while most studies have emphasized that individuals and organizations can profit from their engagements in social networks, this paper suggests a potential dark side of networks by showing that networks can encourage decision makers to persist with their investment in an underperforming—and potentially failing—project. These results can help project managers involved in networking activities to better understand the effects of these activities on their decision policies, and thus draw better and more accurate decisions. Second, this study provides insights into how organizational strategy with respect to dissemination of R&D results and involvement of the organization's R&D managers in the scientific community influences the persistence of underperforming R&D projects, and thereby the organization's R&D expenditures. This can assist top managers to design financial controls and allocate financial resources to managers of underperforming R&D projects in line with the organization's networking strategy.     

The Relationship of R&D/Sales to Firm Performance: An Investigation of Marketing Contingencies*

The relationship between a firm's performance and R&D spending is often imperfectly understood, despite the fact that R&D is often a cornerstone of an effective innovation strategy. Susan Holak, Mark Parry, and Michael Song extend the classic innovation-adoption paradigm developed by Rogers and propose a series of hypotheses describing variations in the relationship between the R&D/sales ratio and a firm's performance. Using data from the PIMS database and contrasting growth-stage and mature-stage firms, the authors report that firm and industry characteristics have an important bearing on the R&D-performance relationship. In addition, managers can influence the incremental effects of added R&D spending on the firm's performance by manipulating certain firm-contingent variables. Increased R&D spending can have either a positive or negative influence on gross margin under various circumstances.     

R &D investments and profitability during the crisis: evidence from Greece

Innovation and Research and Development (R&D) investments have been considered in the literature as a significant determinant of corporate development and sustainability. Previous studies have examined the impact of intangibles on financial performance but not extensively within economic environments of intense financial turmoil. The scope of this study is to shed further light on this issue and examine whether R&D investments had an impact on the profitability of Greek firms especially during the sovereign debt crisis. We collected a sample of Greek corporations that have capitalized their R&D investments and paid significant amounts on R&D expenses during the period 2003–2016. Panel regression results indicated that R&D investments and R&D expenses had a negative impact on the profitability of sample firms before the crisis, but during the crisis (2011–2016) firms which managed to sustain or enhance their level of R&D investments achieved to improve their profitability. These findings corroborate our hypotheses that during a period of limited lending and hearse financial turmoil, R&D investments could be a vital tool for sustaining firms' financial performance. The study offers useful implications for managers and regulators, and contributes to the ongoing debate about the impact of R&D investments on corporate performance.     

Managing innovative R&D teams

Successful R&D groups not only generate innovative ideas, but also transfers these newly created concepts through the organizational system for economic gain. While innovation is not a random process, managers often argue that R&D performance is hard to measure and even more difficult to manage. An exploratory field study into technology-oriented R&D environments determines the principle factors that influence innovation-based performance of R&D teams. The results identify specific barriers and drivers to innovative team performance and provide insight into the type of an organizational environment and managerial leadership that is conducive to innovative R&D team performance. The data further suggest that many of the performance variables have their locus outside the R&D organization. Yet, managerial leadership style, both at the R&D team level and at senior management, has significant impact on creativity that ultimately affects R&D performance.     

Flexibility planning for managing R&D projects under risk

Incorporating managerial flexibility in an innovative R&D project is important, because managers face greater uncertainty in today's competitive and dynamic changing environment. It is essential to bring managerial flexibility into R&D project planning to decrease technical and market risks, while increasing potential market value. The objective of this paper is to develop a flexibility planning methodology based on real option analysis to improve managerial flexibility for R&D projects. The proposed methodology identifies potential risks that may occur during every R&D stage. It also recognizes a cascading option structure to resolve the identified risks, and evaluates and selects adequate options that maximize the potential value of the project. Instead of using a traditional option pricing method, a dynamic programming model that considers multidimensional product performance and market payoff is used to evaluate the R&D project value. Using the proposed methodology, managers can identify future scenarios as a function of their management actions. The proposed flexibility planning methodology can help managers improve managerial flexibility of R&D project and increase the success rate of product launch. A drug development project is used to illustrate the proposed methodology.     

Involving purchasing in new product development

Purchasing is evolving into a strategic business activity and thus also a potential contributor to the successful development of new products. However, the literature on the involvement of purchasing in new product development (NPD) is sorely lacking. We conducted an exploratory study to investigate purchasing's involvement in NPD, the drivers of this involvement and the influence on new product success. We conducted telephone interviews with purchasing and NPD managers from 43 firms. The results show that firms differ in the extent to which they involve purchasing in NPD and that higher involvement has a positive effect on NPD performance. R&D managers can use the results to design a more effective purchasing–R&D interface and increase the success of NPD.     

The link between managerial style and the job characteristics of R&D professionals

Despite a growing body of evidence as to the importance of linking job design to supervisory practices, almost no empirical studies have been conducted on the issue specifically for R&D professionals. The effectiveness of supervisors should differ primarily with respect to their leadership styles. Data obtained from three major types of R&D organizations in Taiwan were used to examine how leadership styles affect the job characteristics of R&D professionals with personal attributes of professionals themselves as the concomitant variables. The leadership styles were defined in terms of a two dimensional construct with the supportive dimension focusing on enhancing relationship and participatory decision making, and the directive dimension emphasizing telling and directing to get tasks accomplished. The results supported most of the hypotheses proposed in the study. In particular, the high correlation of the supportive leadership style and overall job characteristics, across the three types of organizations in the test, demonstrates the importance of incorporating the role of supervision in the R&D job design. The findings have implications for enhancing the leadership effectiveness in managing R&D professionals. Such findings are not only important for R&D managers in newly industrialized countries, but are also valuable to their counterparts in industrialized countries.     

Design principles for the development of measurement systems for research and development processes

Based on a comprehensive literature review and the activities of numerous case study companies, it is argued in this paper that performance measurement in R&D is a fundamental aspect to quality in R&D and to overall business performance. However, it is apparent from the case companies that many companies still struggle with the issue of R&D performance measurement. Excuses for not measuring are easily found, but there are also empirical examples and literature available with suggestions how it can be done. In this article this literature is reviewed and placed within the context of general performance control and contingency theory. Furthermore, the main measurement system design parameters are discussed and some basic system requirements are described as well as several design principles that can be useful for those who accept the challenge of establishing a meaningful measurement system.     

Problems faced by R&D managers in Canadian federal government laboratories

The paper conducts a critical review of the problems faced by middle to first-line managers in managing R&D in Canadian government laboratories. The data come from the published literature, interviews with R&D managers, and information obtained from government employees undergoing training as R&D managers.
The problems are numerous and serious. They arise from a multiplicity of causes related to underfunding and bureaucratic management practices that do not allow for the special nature of R&D. Hiring freezes, staff reductions, travel restrictions and reductions in training budgets are all consequences of underfunding, resulting in an aging workforce and technological obsolescence. Bureaucratic administration rules set by central agencies constrain the freedom of R&D managers to manage effectively, and limit low-level participation in policy-making and planning. The result is that too many management posts are filled by under-achieving scientists and engineers, with resultant consequences for originality and efficiency.
The authors believe that the only cure is to undertake proper funding, recognise the special operational needs of R&D management, and select managers for managerial ability in addition to technical competence.