R&D team diversity and performance in hypercompetitive environments

Research summary : This article examines the effects of an R&D team's composition on its performance outcomes in hypercompetition. The fundamental feature of firms in hypercompetitive settings is that they are constantly challenged to improve their competitiveness in a relentless race to outperform one another. Analyzing a unique data set from the Formula 1 motorsport racing industry, we find an inverse U‐shaped relationship between team diversity in task‐related experience and performance an important result that diverges from well‐established theories developed in more stable environments. Fundamentally, we show that the role of R&D team experience diversity varies depending on the size of the organizations in which R&D teams operate. While we find a moderating effect for firm age, this effect is not as robust as that of firm size. Managerial summary : This article examines the relationship between R&D team composition and performance in fast‐moving environments. Firms in these environments are constantly challenged to improve their competitiveness by outperforming one another. Analyzing a unique data set from the Formula 1 motorsport racing industry, we find that a team's diversity in job‐related experience increases its performance up to a certain extent. Once R&D teams become too diverse, performance decreases because communication and coordination become more difficult. We also show that the role of R&D team diversity varies depending on the size of the organizations in which R&D teams operate. Overall, our findings provide several novel implications for the strategy, innovation, and team literatures. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Understanding and Managing International Product Launch: A Comparison between Developed and Emerging Markets

With the developed market becoming increasingly saturated, companies have turned to the rapidly growing emerging market. To compete effectively in the global marketplace, firms need to develop global market competences, such as effective product launch. Although considerable efforts have been devoted to identifying principles of effective new product launch, most of the literature focuses on a single country (i.e., the domestic market) and provides little direct cross‐national comparison. The objective of this study is to provide a better understanding of the patterns of effective product launch in the developed and emerging markets. Drawing from the contingency perceptive, the authors propose a conceptual model that emphasizes the central role of tactical launch decisions and the need to cope with the internal and external constraints for maximum new product performance. The research model is tested on 284 new products launched in the United States and 97 in Taiwan. Although prior literature suggested certain elements of global product launch may be standardized for purposes of efficiencies, the empirical data from this study suggests that global launch requires some degree of customization. The insights of the findings reveal that while some tactical launch decisions are effective for both emerging and mature markets, some are detrimental to each other. For example, customer education preannouncement and promotion discount pricing strategy enhance new product performance and preemption preannouncement strategy upset consumers for both the Taiwan and U.S. market. However, there are some cross‐national differences. Emotional advertising strategy is generally appreciated in the U.S. market but not in the Taiwan market. For management practice, the findings suggest the distinct patterns of effective product launch for the emerging and mature market using the United States and Taiwan as examples.     

The Impact of Product Portfolio Strategy on Financial Performance: The Roles of Product Development and Market Entry Decisions

Innovation is one of the most important issues facing business today. The major difficulty in managing innovation is that managers must do so against a constantly shifting backdrop as technologies, competitors, and markets constantly evolve. Managers determine the product portfolio through key decisions about product development and market entry. Key strategic questions are what portfolio strategies provide the greatest reward. The purpose of this study is to understand the relative financial values of each component of a product portfolio. Specifically, the paper examines the short‐term and long‐term financial impacts of product development strategy and market entry strategy. These strategies reflect two critical tensions that must be balanced in product portfolio decision making and essentially determine a firm's product portfolio. In doing so, the paper also investigates how a firm's capabilities drive each component of a product portfolio. From the empirical analyses in the context of the biomedical device industry, the paper found important insights regarding product portfolio strategies. First, a large product portfolio helps a firm's financial performance. In particular, the pioneering new products have strongest impacts on short‐term performances, and nonpioneering mature products do not provide significant contribution. Second, the results indicate a persistent first‐mover advantage. The first‐to‐market new products yield not only an immediate effect, but also persistent long‐term effects, suggesting that it is important to be first in the market even though there may be short‐term losses. Third, the results suggest the need to balance between “mature” and “new” products. Also, firms need to balance “first‐to‐market” and “late‐entered” products. Because a new or pioneering product requires more resource, it may hurt other products in the portfolio. Thus, without support from mature or follower products, new products and pioneering products alone may not increase firm sales or profit. Fourth, from a long‐term perspective, the paper found that the financial market only rewards a firm's overall capability to deliver new products first in the marketplace. Thus, short‐term performance is mainly driven by product‐level innovativeness, whereas firm‐level innovativeness enhances forward‐looking long‐term performance. Fifth, the paper also found that pioneering new products are driven by integrating both primary and complementary technological capabilities. And nonpioneering new products are mainly driven by the capabilities in primary technology domain. These results provide important insight into the relative value and timing of return on investment in radical versus incremental innovation and alternative market entry strategies. By understanding the performance trade‐offs of these different factors in the short and long term, one can develop better guidelines for optimizing innovation strategies, and their dependence on both external and internal environmental conditions.     

Creating barriers for foreign competitors: a study of the impact of anti-dumping actions on the performance of U.S. firms

This study investigates whether anti-dumping statutes are effective at improving the performance of U.S. firms. As international trade grows and competitors increasingly cross national borders to enter new markets, U.S. trade law becomes a potentially important tool for managers as they consider how to create barriers for foreign competitors. The results of this study suggest that the anti-dumping laws significantly increase returns of U.S. firms that pursue anti-dumping protection. The average petitioner between 1980 and 1992 received a $46 million increase in market value as a result of filing an anti-dumping petition. However, no significant change in market value was associated with preliminary or final determinations of the International Trade Commission, except when petitions received a negative determination at the final stage of the process. A negative determination at the final stage of the process resulted in a loss of market value. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

New Product Development Speed: Too Much of a Good Thing?

New product development (NPD) speed has become increasingly important for managing innovation in fast‐changing business environments due to continuous reduction in the product life cycle time and increase in competition from technological advancements and globalization. While the existing literature has not produced consistent results regarding the relationship between speed and success for NPD projects, many scholars and practitioners assert that increasing NPD speed is virtually always important to NPD success. The purpose of this paper is to examine the implicit assumption that faster is better as it relates to new product success (NPS). From the perspectives of time‐compression diseconomies and absorptive capacity, the authors question the assumption that speed has a linear relationship with success. The authors further argue that time‐compression diseconomies depend on levels of uncertainty involved in NPD projects. Using survey data of 471 NPD projects, the hypotheses were tested by hierarchical regression analysis and subgroup polynomial regression. The results of this study indicate that NPD speed has a curvilinear relationship with NPS, and the nature of the speed–success relationship varies, depending on type and level of uncertainty. When turbulence or technological newness is high, the relationship is curvilinear, but when uncertainties are low, the relationship is linear. In contrast, the results of this study suggest a curvilinear relationship under conditions of low market newness but not when market newness is high. The present paper asserts that time‐compression diseconomies and absorptive capacity are important theoretical constructs in understanding speed in NPD. The different impact of market newness and market turbulence on NPD speed supports the distinction of newness and turbulence as two different sources of uncertainty. Discussion focuses on the implications of NPD speed under the different conditions of uncertainty. NPD teams need to pursue NPD speed as a critical strategy, but it is necessary to analyze the source and degree of uncertainty about projects before a time‐based strategy is selected. In order to address the challenges of high uncertainty, a firm needs to probe, learn, and iterate fast. In particular, NPD teams need to distinguish between the different requirements for new products in emerging and new markets, and those in fast‐changing markets. Moreover, NPD teams need to balance how fast they need to go with how fast they can go by considering team absorptive capacity and customer absorptive capacity.     

The Effect of Explicit Communication on pricing: Evidence from the Collapse of a Gasoline Cartel

We study the collapse of collusion in Québec's retail gasoline market following a Competition Bureau investigation, and show that it involved two empirical regularities: high margins, and asymmetric price adjustments. Using weekly, station‐level prices we test whether collusion was successful, and whether asymmetric adjustments were part of the cartel's strategy. We do so in the markets targeted by the investigation, and in markets throughout the province with similar pre‐collapse pricing (cyclical markets). Our results suggest that stations in both target and cyclical markets adjusted pricing following the announcement: margins fell (by 30%/15% in target/cyclical markets), and adjustments became more symmetric.     

New Product Strategies of Large, Dominant Product Manufacturing Firms: An Exploratory Analysis

Although researchers have expended considerable effort exploring the links between new product strategy and firm-level performance, most studies of this subject focus on small- to medium-sized firms. Compared to smaller firms, however, large companies typically maintain broader portfolios of products and have easier access to capital markets. Such fundamental differences suggest the need for closer examination of the relationship between new product strategy and the performance of large firms. Based on a study of 459 new products introduced during a 5-year period, Richard W. Firth and V. K. Narayanan profile the new product strategies of 18 large companies. They examine the methods used to acquire new products (internal development or external sources) as well as three dimensions of each firm's new product introductions: newness of embodied technology, newness of market application, and innovativeness in the market. In other words, these profiles identify the degree to which a firm's new product introductions involve core technologies and markets that are new to the firm, as well as the degree to which the market views these products as innovative. Because new product strategy is an investment decision, the study also examines the relationship between these strategic profiles and two facets of firm-level performance: risk and return. The study identifies five archetypes of new product strategy: Innovators, who produce innovative products by using their existing resources; Investors in Technology, who focus on expanding their technological base. Searching for New Markets, firms that venture into unfamiliar markets by introducing products closely aligned with those in their existing portfolios; Business as Usual, firms that rely on existing technologies and products to serve existing markets; and Middle-of-the-Road, firms content to introduce new products rated as low to moderate along all three dimensions of the strategic profile. For new products closely aligned with their core markets and technologies, the firms in this study typically rely on internal development. To introduce products involving new technologies or market applications, they turn to acquisition from external sources. Firms that emphasized market innovativeness in their new product introductions enjoyed higher returns than less innovative firms. And contrary to conventional wisdom, they gained this advantage without an accompanying increase in risk. In other words, continual innovation might provide a large firm with the means for achieving higher returns without higher risk.     

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.     

The Growing Importance of Family: Evidence from Brothers’ Earnings

We examine between‐brother correlation of earnings, family income, and wages from two cohorts of the National Longitudinal Surveys. Young brothers who entered the labor market in the 1970s had lower correlations of economic outcomes than did those who entered in the 1980s and early 1990s. Neither the rising brother correlation in education nor the rising return to schooling accounts for much of the increase in the brother correlation in earnings. These results suggest that family and community influences other than years of education that are shared by brothers have become increasingly important in determining economic outcomes.     

Incumbents,technological change and institutions: How the value of complementary resources varies across markets

This article examines the influence of complementary resources on the performance of incumbents after a radical technological change. In investigating this relationship, we join the technological management literature and the institution‐based view of strategy and maintain that the value of complementary resources is contingent on the institutional environment in which the firm operates. In particular, we submit that formal institutions, both economic and political, moderate the relationship between the stock of complementary assets and firm performance. We test our hypotheses in the context of the world mobile telecommunications industry (39 countries and 134 mobile service providers). Our findings reveal how these resources are more valuable for incumbents in markets where market‐supporting institutions are weaker and political stability is higher. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Launch Strategy and New Product Performance: An Empirical Examination in The Netherlands

Although previous research has investigated the concept and contents of new product performance, there is still no consensus about the managerial decisions that constitute a launch strategy and how such decisions impact new product performance. The research objective for the present investigation is to assess the impact of launch strategy and market characteristics on new product performance and to test the stability of this impact across consumer and industrial products. Data were collected on 272 consumer and industrial new products in The Netherlands through a mail questionnaire approach. We based our definition of a launch strategy on an extensive literature review and interviews with managers. Our conceptualization of new product performance represented two dimensions, namely, market acceptance and product performance. The market acceptance dimension reflects the new product's market position and sales levels. The product performance dimension refers to the quality and technical performance level of the new product. This richer specification of the dependent variable provides a better view on which launch decisions impact which dimensions of new product performance. The impact of launch strategy was higher for market acceptance than for product performance, overall and for both consumer and industrial subsamples separately. In line with results from recent studies, overall, market acceptance is influenced by the product's innovativeness, timing of market entry, breadth of assortment, branding, pricing, the objective of increasing market penetration, and competitor reactions. Product performance is influenced by the product's innovativeness, breadth of assortment, and by the objective of using an existing market. Analyzing the consumer and industrial products separately showed that the general picture of launch decisions and their impact on the dependent variables was comparable across the total sample and both subsamples, indicating that heterogeneous samples in new product launch research may not cause major interpretation problems. Second, the analyses revealed that some launch decisions are more important in attaining new product success for consumer products than for industrial products, and vice versa. While these decisions do not lead to contradicting results in the samples, they show that some decisions may be especially relevant for only consumer or industrial products. We discuss research and managerial implications of the results.     

Product price and performance level in one market or two separated markets under various cost structures and functions

Market characteristics, including intrinsic demand and customer sensitivity on price and product performance level, are distinct at different markets. Comparisons of various product development strategies in one market or two geographically separated markets are conducted for three classes of products: development intensive products (DIPs) with constant unit cost, marginal cost-intensive products (MIPs) with constant fixed cost, and marginal and development intensive products (MDIPs) with non-constant unit cost and fixed cost. Results show that larger demand size, less customer sensitivity on price and/or more sensitivity on performance level lead to more profit, a higher sale price and a not-lower product performance. The customer reservation or the saturation performance level should be generally adopted though the optimal performance level does exist occasionally. Unit cost and/or fixed cost must increase in performance at an increasing rate for the existence of one optimal performance level. Due to the impact of demand size, one high-end (low-end) MDIP or DIP could be introduced into one low-end (high-end) market at a different price if the demand size is significantly large in the low-end market. For DIPs, offering one niche high-end product is not worse than offering the low-end product into two markets. For MIPs with negligible fixed cost, the product line strategy is not worse than the standard product development strategy. Additionally, the product cost reduction approach adopted in one product line has significant effects on the best product development strategy and sequence.     

An examination into the causal logic of rent generation: contrasting Porter's competitive strategy framework and the resource‐based perspective

In this study we revisit some fundamental questions that are increasingly at the heart of current strategic management discourse regarding the relative impact of industry and firm‐specific factors on sustainable competitive advantage. We explore this issue by referring to respective assertions of two major perspectives that dominate the literature over the last two decades: the Porter framework of competitive strategy and the more recent resource‐based view of the firm. A composite model is proposed which elaborates upon both perspectives' divergent causal logic with respect to the conditions relevant for firm success. Empirical findings suggest that industry and firm specific effects are both important but explain different dimensions of performance. Where industry forces influence market performance and profitability, firm assets act upon accomplishments in the market arena (i.e., market performance), and via the latter, to profitability. The paper concludes with directions for future research that will seek to integrate both content and process aspects of firm behavior. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Do Homeowners Mark to Market? A Comparison of Self‐Reported and Estimated Market Home Values During the Housing Boom and Bust

This article examines homeowners’ self‐reported values in the American Housing Survey and the Health and Retirement Study from the start of the recent housing price run‐ups through recent price declines. We compare ZIP‐Code‐level market‐based estimates of housing prices to those derived from homeowners’ self‐reported values. We show that there are systematic differences which vary with market conditions and the amount of equity owners hold in their homes. When prices have fallen, homeowners systematically state that their homes are worth more than market estimates suggest, and homeowners with little or no equity in their homes state values above the market estimates to a greater degree. Over time, homeowners appear to adjust their assessments to be more in line with past market trends, but only slowly. Our results suggest that underwater borrowers are likely to understate their losses and either may not be aware that their mortgages are underwater or underestimate the degree to which they are.     

When Product Development Performance Makes a Difference: A Statistical Analysis in the Electronics Industry

Throughout the pages of JPIM and other publications, researchers and practitioners devote considerable effort to identifying the dimensions of new-product development (NPD) performance that relate most closely to business success. Although we may hope to unveil a set of universal truths about the relationship between NPD performance and business success, the relevant NPD performance measures appear to depend on the industry in which a firm competes. In fact, Christian Terwiesch, Christoph Loch, and Martin Niederkofler suggest that the overall relevance of NPD performance to business success depends on the firm's competitive market environment. In a study of 86 business units operating in 12 different electronics industries worldwide, they develop a market contingency framework for understanding the impact of NPD performance on a firm's profitability. Their study uses data from the “Excellence in Electronics” project, a joint research effort by Stanford University, the University of Augsburg, and McKinsey & Co. They describe market context in terms of three dimensions: market share, market growth, and external stability—that is, the average product life cycle duration in the market. Looking at all 86 business units in the study, they find that industry membership accounts for 23% of the variance in profits, with 18 percent of the variance determined by industry profitability and 5% by the three dimensions of market context. For the firms in the study, development performance has the most significant effect in slow-growth markets and in markets with long product life cycles. In these stable industries, low development intensity, product line freshness, and technical product performance increase profitability. The results indicate that NPD performance plays a much more important role for explaining the profitability of dominant firms than that of the low-market-share firms in the study. NPD performance explains 30% of the profitability variance among the high-market-share business units in the study, but none of the variance for the low-market-share business units. Although the profitability of the smaller firms in the study is driven primarily by the industry environment, these firms can compete on the basis of superior technical performance.     

The Impact of the Corporate Mind‐set on New Product Launch Strategy and Market Performance

In the last decade, there has been an increasing interest in the link between new product launch strategy and market performance. So far, new product launch research has focused on this performance relationship without giving much attention to background factors that can facilitate or inhibit successful launch strategies. However, investigating such antecedents that set the framework in which different strategic launch decisions enable or prevent the market performance of new products is useful for enhancing the current state of knowledge. Drawing on the concept of a firm's orientation, the present study discusses the influence of the corporate mind‐set on new product launch strategy and market performance. It is hypothesized that the capability to successfully launch new products is based on the interplay between a firm's mind‐set (i.e., an analytical, risk‐taking, and aggressive posture) and its strategic launch decisions on setting launch objectives, selecting target markets, and positioning the new product. A research model with mediating effects is proposed, where the corporate mind‐set determines the launch strategy decisions, which in turn impact market performance. The model is tested with data on 113 industrial new products launched in business‐to‐business markets in Germany using a multiple informant approach. The results support the mediated model as the dimensions of the corporate mind‐set have a significant impact on most strategic launch decisions, which in turn significantly contribute to market performance. It is found that while an analytical posture relates to all three strategic launch decisions, risk taking and an aggressive posture have a significant impact on two, respectively one, launch strategy elements. These findings confirm the importance of investigating antecedents for a successful new product launch, as the corporate mind‐set serves as a background resource that sets the framework for successful new product launch decisions. In the final section implications for research and managerial practice as well as limitations of this research are provided.     

Price relations between export and domestic rice markets in Thailand

Many rice importing countries argue that rice exporting nations isolate their domestic markets through the use of stabilization pricing policies which cause international rice markets to become excessively volatile. For the argument to hold any weight, price transmission between exporting countries’ domestic and export markets should be unidirectional whereby export prices are driven by domestic prices but domestic prices are not affected by export prices. The study tests the hypothesis on Thailand, traditionally the world’s largest rice exporter. The results from the causality tests are not entirely clear, however the results from the impulse response functions show that while the shocks originating in the domestic market are higher in magnitude in the export market in the short-run, the shocks originating in the export market are more persistent in the domestic market. This suggests that although Thailand’s domestic policies are somewhat effective in the immediate months after the shock they allow price transmission from its export market to transfer over to its domestic market in the long-run. The results therefore imply that Thailand’s domestic pricing programs are not heavily distorting world rice markets.     

Contingent Product Design and Marketing Strategies Influencing New Product Success and Failure in U.S. and Japanese Electronics Firms

The commercial success or failure of a product doesn't rest solely on the whims of the marketplace. The myriad, often interdependent, strategic trade-offs made throughout the product development process go a long way toward determining whether a product succeeds or fails. The key to success often rests in finding the right combination of product design and market choice decisions. Toward that end, William E. Souder and X. Michael Song examine the relationship between product success and several product design and market choice strategies. In particular, they explore the possibility that the correct strategy combination differs depending on a firm's perception of market uncertainty, which they measure in terms of the respondents' perceived familiarity with the market for a product, perceived understanding of customer needs, and perceived capability to translate those needs into product performance specifications. Recognizing that the correct combination of strategic choices may also depend on firm size, industry, and culture, the study focuses on small U.S. suppliers of electronics components. Fortune 500 producers of electronics final products, and Japanese producers of electronics final products. For the small U.S. firms in the study, an emphasis on performance superiority, technical superiority, or radically new products provides a recipe for failure under low market uncertainty. Even under high market uncertainty, these characteristics do not equate to success for the small U.S. firms in this study. The findings suggest that these firms should focus on design compatibility with a purchaser's installed base. The responses from Fortune 500 firms and Japanese companies indicate that under low market uncertainty these larger organizations should consider emphasizing compatibility and avoiding radical designs. For markets that the larger firms perceive to be highly uncertain, the results suggest that these companies should emphasize performance superiority, technical superiority, and radical designs. The findings related to market choice strategies also support the notion that the correct combination of strategic decisions depends on firm size, culture, and the perceived level of market uncertainty. However, the guidelines presented in this study should not be construed as hard-and-fast rules for formulating product strategy. Instead, the results presented here will be helpful for challenging assumptions and guiding actions, as one element in the effort to shape an effective product strategy.     

Product‐market strategy and the marketing capabilities of the firm: impact on market effectiveness and cash flow performance

We report on two studies (a single and a multi‐industry) that empirically investigate a nomological network of relationships between strategic business unit product‐market strategy (differentiation, cost‐focus, and product‐market scope), marketing capabilities (architectural and specialized capabilities, as well as their integration), and business unit performance (market effectiveness and subsequent one‐year objective cash flow), along with a series of controls. Addressing important lacunae in the resource‐based view our main research objective is to augment understanding of how critical firm‐level marketing capabilities enable the realization of strategy, thus, further advancing both the resource‐based view and more recent capabilities theorizing. Specifically, we test seven hypotheses and find strong evidence that both architectural and specialized marketing capabilities, and their integration, positively mediate the product‐market strategy and derived business unit performance relationship. In contrast to many extant studies, both survey and objectively measured data are combined, and because the secondary data collected contains both resource‐level (input) data and subsequent one‐year financial data, a higher level of confidence may be attributable to our findings. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Role of Hybrid Organizations in Scaling Social Innovations in Bottom‐of‐the‐Pyramid Markets: Insights from Microfinance in India

While social innovations that solve financial exclusion have gained increasing attention as a means of helping the poor in developing markets, little research has empirically investigated the types of organizations that drive these innovations to achieve scale. Hybrids, a type of organization that exist in between traditional organizational forms, are said to have rapidly gained prevalence, especially in bottom‐of‐the‐pyramid markets. Some scholars claim that hybrids are largely responsible for the spread of established social innovations, yet hybrids do not constitute a homogenous group; instead each hybrid form exists on a spectrum between pure for‐profit and not‐for‐profit organizational forms. It is important that empirical research investigates the role that various hybrid forms play in scaling established social innovations, especially under various bottom‐of‐the‐pyramid market conditions. To this end, using two market‐level outcome measures of scale achieved (prevalence and usage), the authors pursue two research objectives: to study (1) the extent to which, alternative hybrid forms (not‐for‐profit, quasi‐profit, and for‐profit hybrids) drive social innovation; and (2) the relative propensity of these hybrid forms to drive social innovation under varying bottom‐of‐the‐pyramid market conditions, specifically varying levels of development and social diversity. By theorizing how different organizational forms act given their degree of hybridity, the authors develop and test six hypotheses using data sets on microfinance organizations in India. Accordingly, they find that (1) compared with not‐for‐profit and for‐profit hybrids, quasi‐profit hybrids have a propensity to become more prevalent and achieve greater usage in bottom‐of‐the‐pyramid markets overall. Yet, within the spectrum of hybrid forms, (2) not‐for‐profit hybrids are more likely to become more prevalent and achieve greater usage in markets with lower development levels, whereas (3) for‐profit hybrids are more likely to become more prevalent and achieve greater usage in markets with lower social diversity when compared with other hybrid forms.