Impacts of Hedonic and Utilitarian User Motives on the Innovativeness of User‐Developed Solutions

When individual consumers develop products for their own use, they in part expect to be rewarded by the use value of what they are creating (utilitarian user motives), and in part expect to be rewarded intrinsically by such things as the fun and learning experience derived from creating it (hedonic user motives). This paper shows a first‐of‐type study to understand the relationship between individual consumers' motives to innovate and the novelty and utility of the solutions they develop. The theoretical framework integrates self‐determination theory and goal‐setting theory. The major findings of this study are that utilitarian user motives positively affect the utility of user‐developed innovations. In contrast, hedonic user motives drive solution novelty; the more an innovator is “in it for fun,” the more novel the solution developed. However, hedonic user motives also have an inverted U‐shaped relationship with solution utility. When the dominant motive for developing an innovation is the joy of the creative process rather than use value, the utility of what is developed is negatively affected. These findings are of research interest, and can be of significant practical interest to producers hoping to benefit from user‐developed innovations. For the first time, it has been possible to show that the adjustment of hedonic rewards, for example by means such as gamification, can affect the nature and utility of solutions individuals create.     

Is Boreout a Threat to Frontline Employees' Innovative Work Behavior?

With the recognition that innovation is the lifeblood of competitive firms, researchers have investigated multiple antecedents of employees' innovative work behaviors. Most studies focus on supportive work conditions, work requirements, or even high work challenges as drivers of innovative work behavior as the extent to which frontline employees (FLEs) generate new problem‐solving ideas and transform these into uses during the service encounter. This study focuses instead on a lack of resources at the service encounter. Specifically, boreout is a negative psychological state of low work‐related arousal, manifested in three main forms: a crisis of meaning at work, job boredom, and crisis of growth. According to the conservation of resources theory, these three dimensions of job boreout as lack of resources draw energy from FLEs and thus, likely affect innovative work behavior. Data from 142 FLEs and their customers confirm that these dimensions of boreout affect FLEs' innovative work behavior, though in varying ways. A crisis of meaning at work and crisis of growth both impede innovative work behavior, but job boredom has no effect. Furthermore, support provided by customers moderates the relationships of these three boreout dimensions with innovative work behavior in unique ways.     

How costly is the Sarbanes Oxley Act? Evidence on the effects of the Act on corporate profitability

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX) was intended to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures. However, critics have argued that the costs of SOX far outweigh its intended benefits. Prior studies based on stock-price reactions to SOX-related events document mixed evidence on the expected impact of SOX. In contrast, we provide evidence on the net realized costs of SOX by examining its impact on operating profitability. We find that average cash flows decline by 1.3% of total assets after SOX. These costs are more significant for smaller firms, for more complex firms, and for firms with lower-growth opportunities. Annually, these costs range from $6 million for smaller firms to $39 million for larger firms. Further, we document that net SOX-related costs are not limited to one-time expenses associated with internal-control design and implementation. In aggregate, for the 1428 firms in our sample, these costs amount to about $19 billion per year. Profitability is lower for up to four years post-SOX. To our knowledge, ours are the first estimates of the realized net costs imposed by SOX.     

Connecting Interfirm and Intrafirm Collaboration in NPD Projects: Does Innovation Context Matter?

Interfirm collaboration is an important strategy for firms to generate new products and services. Whereas existing research emphasizes the importance of interfirm collaboration engagement to realize synergistic benefits in interfirm NPD projects, it remains surprisingly silent on the potential impact of intrafirm relational processes and how they can impact the interfirm setting. In this article, we therefore explore the impact of intrafirm collaboration engagement on the relationship between interfirm collaboration engagement and new product development (NPD) performance in interfirm NPD projects. Relying on insights from information processing theory, the authors hypothesize that intrafirm collaboration engagement increases firms' capacity to process complex information flows in the case of extensive interfirm collaboration engagement. Moreover, it is expect that the added value of extensive intrafirm collaboration engagement depends on the innovation objective (i.e., incremental versus radical new product development) of the interfirm NPD project. In particular, we hypothesize that the positive moderating impact of intrafirm collaboration engagement on the relationship between interfirm collaboration engagement and NPD performance is stronger for radical interfirm projects than incremental interfirm projects. Analyzing 195 interfirm NPD projects, a negative interaction effect between interfirm and intrafirm collaboration engagement is observed in radical interfirm NPD projects, whereas significant interactions between them remain absent in incremental interfirm NPD projects. Jointly, these findings provide first evidence that intrafirm relational processes can substantially impact partners' ability to realize relational rents in interfirm settings. Moreover, the negative interaction effect between interfirm and intrafirm collaboration engagement points to potential trade‐offs between inward‐looking and outward‐looking absorptive capacity.     

Achieving Temporal Ambidexterity in New Ventures

Organizations face a common intertemporal choice problem, where actions suitable in the shortterm are different from those that work in the longterm. Building on the organizational ambidexterity theory, we argue that organizations can reconcile their short‐term and long‐term tensions, but this does necessitate managerial endeavours that orchestrate this reconciliation. We introduce the concept of temporal ambidexterity and define four intertemporal tensions involving an organization’s objectives, resources, markets, and uncertainty. We examine how firms can address these tensions successfully in the context of new ventures, and to do so we focus on three managerial capabilities of founder‐CEOs: expertise breadth, external connectivity, and empowering leadership. Results from 243 new ventures in China suggest that temporal ambidexterity improves with these managerial capabilities, and more so for younger ventures. Our findings shed light on solutions and mechanisms by which intertemporal balance is fulfilled, particularly for new ventures in a dynamic environment.     

Capital Cities in the New EU States—Economic Status Quo and Current Trends

In the course of the economic catching-up process of the new EU states, the capital cities of the countries in central and eastern Europe were the economically most successful regions in their countries. How distinct are economic disparities between the capitals and the rest of the countries today? What were the determinants of the related economic developments? And do current economic trends support the leading position of the capital cities in the new member states?      

Testing with many weak instruments

This paper establishes the asymptotic distributions of the likelihood ratio (LR), Anderson–Rubin (AR), and Lagrange multiplier (LM) test statistics under “many weak IV asymptotics.” These asymptotics are relevant when the number of IVs is large and the coefficients on the IVs are relatively small. The asymptotic results hold under the null and under suitable alternatives. Hence, power comparisons can be made.