Should SMEs get out of the building? Examining the role of customer co-creation on radical organizational creativity*

Facing the liability of smallness, SMEs face substantial challenges in internally developing solutions to spur the generation of new ideas that challenge existing practices. In this study, we point to co-creation with customers as an external solution to boost radical organizational creativity. Relying on a sample of SMEs in the Northern Netherlands, we examine the impact of co-creation on radical organizational creativity. Following insights from organizational learning theory, we also test the moderating effect of the nature of the organizational structure and the level of organizational creativity support. We find that customer co-creation has a positive impact on SME’s radical creativity. Surprisingly, we find that organizational creativity support negatively moderates this relationship. Together these findings enrich our theoretical understanding of the drivers of radical organizational creativity. Moreover, they provide SME managers specific guidelines on how to generate radically new ideas.     

Does Strategic Planning Enhance or Impede Innovation and Firm Performance?*

Does strategic planning enhance or impede innovation and firm performance? The current literature provides contradictory views. This study extends the resource‐advantage theory to examine the conditions in which strategic planning increases or decreases the number of new product development projects and firm performance. The authors test the theoretical model by collecting data from 227 firms. The empirical evidence suggests that more strategic planning and more new product development (NPD) projects lead to better firm performance. Firms with organizational redundancy benefit more from strategic planning than firms with less organizational redundancy. Increasing R&D intensity boosts both the number of NPD projects and firm performance. Strategic planning is more effective in larger firms with higher R&D intensity for increasing the number of NPD projects. The results reported in this study also consist of several findings that challenge the traditional views of strategic planning. The evidence suggests that strategic planning impedes, not enhances, the number of NPD projects. Larger firms benefit less, not more, from strategic planning for improving firm performance. Larger firms do not necessarily create more NPD projects. Increasing organizational redundancy has no effect on the number of NPD projects. These empirical results provide important strategic implications. First, managers should be aware that, in general, formal strategic planning decreases the number of NPD projects for innovation management. Improvised rather than planned activities are more conducive to creating NPD project ideas. Moreover, innovations tend to emerge from improvisational processes, during which the impromptu execution of NPD activities without planning spurs “thinking outside the box,” which enhances the process of creating NPD project ideas. Therefore, more flexible strategic plans that accommodate potential improvisation may be needed in NPD management since innovation‐related activities cannot be planned precisely due to the unexpected jolts and contingencies of the NPD process. Second, large firms with high levels of R&D intensity can overcome the negative effect of strategic planning on the number of NPD projects. Specifically, a firm's abundant resources, when allocated and deployed for NPD activities, signal the high priority and importance of the NPD activities and thus motivate employees to acquire, collect, and gather customer and technical knowledge, which leads to creating more NPD projects. Finally, managers must understand that managing strategic planning and generating NPD project ideas are beneficial to the ultimate outcome of firm performance despite the adverse relationship between strategic planning and the number of NPD projects.     

Individual performance in a coopetitive R&D alliance: motivation,opportunity and ability

This study examines individual knowledge sharing in a coopetitive R&D alliance. R&D is increasingly carried out in an R&D alliance setting, where individuals share highly specialized tacit knowledge crossing firm boundaries. A particular challenging setting is the coopetitive R&D alliance, where partner firms partially compete and individuals may leak competitive knowledge. This setting has been studied on the level of the partner firm. We want to deepen insights by examining the individual level. Drawing on the motivation‐opportunity‐ability framework, we study the influence of individuals’ job experience (ability) on their performance in the alliance. We also examine effects of two‐ and three‐way interactions between job experience, a central position in the social alliance network (opportunity) and intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. We find a positive association of job experience with individual performance, a positive interaction between job experience and extrinsic motivation and a positive three‐way interaction between job experience, central network position and intrinsic motivation, and discuss the impact of these findings.     

Improving new technology venture performance under direct and indirect network externality conditions

This study compares the effectiveness of five responses to external uncertainty in markets with network externalities: avoidance, imitation, control, cooperation, and real options reasoning as a form of strategic flexibility. Our analysis of 385 new technology ventures shows that direct and indirect network externalities have opposite effects on the effectiveness of these strategies. Moreover, under network externalities, attempts to make ventures less dependent upon environmental instabilities perform differently compared to attempts to control the environment. Finally, we show that real options reasoning does not always perform better under conditions of higher uncertainty, such as uncertainty due to direct network externalities.     

The Effect of IT and Co-location on Knowledge Dissemination

Due to the increasing globalization of businesses, new ideas for innovation need to be disseminated rapidly both within and across different departments and divisions. Frequently, ideas and information are dispersed over globally distributed organizations or team members. As a result, the exchange of knowledge has become not only very important for innovation but also highly complex. To facilitate this knowledge exchange, electronically mediated interactions are growing rapidly, replacing traditional face‐to‐face communications. However, literature provides contradicting results regarding the effectiveness of computer‐mediated communication (CMC) versus face‐to‐face communication. This study attempts to reconcile differences in the literature on the benefits of CMC technologies and co‐location. Focusing on knowledge dissemination in technology development processes in high‐technology firms, the study investigates the relative impact of CMC technologies and co‐location of research and development (R&D) staff, as well as the mutual interaction between them. The present article hypothesizes that CMC technologies and co‐location of R&D staff have a positive impact on knowledge dissemination. Further, it is hypothesized that it is more favorable to co‐locate R&D staff than to invest in CMC technologies and that the effects of co‐location and CMC interact negatively. These hypotheses are tested using empirical data collected from 277 high‐technology firms in the United States, and the results are generalized by conducting the same test on data from 125 high‐technology firms in the Netherlands. Tests are conducted in a real‐world setting, differing from previous comparative studies that mainly used laboratory experiments. Empirical results support the main effects of CMC technologies and co‐location of R&D staff on knowledge dissemination. Other empirical results contradict conventional wisdom. Investing in CMC technologies is found to be favorable over co‐locating R&D staff for knowledge dissemination. Moreover, the two communication channels strengthen each other. The discussion section presents the contours of a firm‐level theory on communication infrastructures and knowledge dissemination, focusing on the scope and the heterogeneity of knowledge dissemination, which may explain these initially surprising results. From the arguments it follows that the choice for investment in co‐location or CMC technologies depends on the scope of knowledge dissemination that has to be facilitated. Furthermore, the conclusion is made that effective knowledge dissemination requires a balanced investment in co‐location and information technologies to be able to deal with the heterogeneous but interdependent types of knowledge dissemination.     

Factors for improving the level of knowledge generation in new product development

Globalization and other rapid changes in markets and technologies increasingly require companies to generate new knowledge in order to remain competitive. In order to innovate successfully, firms must generate knowledge faster than their rivals. This study develops and tests a conceptual model that focuses on how managerial controllable variables influence the level of knowledge generation in new product development. Based on literature and 'theory-in-use' field research in seven knowledge-intensive organizations, the authors developed research hypotheses and tested the hypotheses using data collected from 277 firms in high technology industries. The findings suggest that information technologies, organizational crisis, individual commitment, the R&D budget, and job rotation increase levels of knowledge generation, whereas lead user and supplier networks are negatively associated with the level of knowledge generation in new product development, and the influence of co-location of R&D staff is not significant.     

An Empirical Investigation into the Antecedents of Knowledge Dissemination at the Strategic Business Unit Level

Knowledge dissemination is of crucial importance for the strategic planning in new product development. Many new ideas stem from recombination of previously successful, disseminated actions, and knowledge dissemination offers a clear overview of market needs, technology developments, and competitors' actions. Moreover, in dynamic environments, where strategic planning has to be added by some kind of improvisation, knowledge dissemination leads to a high quality of improvisation. It leads to a quick awareness of external or internal surprises, gives an opportunity to learn quickly from the past, and compensates for a coordination mechanism instead of planning. The dissemination of knowledge does not always happen spontaneously. Especially, people with a technical background often are highly individualistic and do not disseminate knowledge naturally. So, this must be fostered by the organization. In management research, particularly on technology and innovation management, many facilitating factors have been identified that enhance communication. Intuitively, they also would seem useful in enhancing knowledge dissemination; however, these factors have not been tested empirically for this specific use. Research on knowledge and its management has not given much attention to the way knowledge in an organization is disseminated and the factors that can facilitate it. If such factors are mentioned, they are not tested empirically and their relative impact is not addressed. In this study we identified 17 important factors in enhancing knowledge dissemination and validated 10 of these factors empirically and determined their relative impact. We focused on technological knowledge in new product development—not on the project level but on the level of the strategic business unit. The field research comprised three parts. In the first step, we conducted in‐depth interviews with research and development (R&D) managers and their supervisors to select the most important potential facilitating factors. In the second step, in‐depth interviews with senior executives, information technology (IT) officers, and R&D experts were conducted to determine whether the constructs regarding knowledge dissemination and the potential facilitating factors had face validity. Finally, the potential factors were tested empirically in 277 U.S. high‐technology firms at the strategic business unit (SBU) level. It was our intention to examine potential factors beyond the level of the particular project, so we looked for antecedents in an SBU environment with a longer‐term impact. Our results indicate that individual commitment to the firm is very important to facilitate knowledge dissemination as well as organizational crises and risk‐taking behavior. Individual commitment was found to have the greatest impact on the level of knowledge dissemination, followed by organizational crisis and risk‐taking behavior. It is thus up to management to find new ways to control individual commitment. More research, however, is required to better understand the ways by which managerial interventions stimulates knowledge dissemination.     

Success Factors in New Ventures: A Meta‐analysis*

Technology entrepreneurship is key to economic development. New technology ventures (NTVs) can have positive effects on employment and could rejuvenate industries with disruptive technologies. However, NTVs have a limited survival rate. In our most recent empirical study of 11,259 NTVs established between 1991 and 2000 in the United States, we found that after four years only 36 percent, or 4,062, of companies with more than five full‐time employees, had survived. After five years, the survival rate fell to 21.9 percent, leaving only 2,471 firms still in operation with more than five full‐time employees. Thus, it is important to examine how new technology ventures can better survive. In the academic literature, a number of studies focus on success factors for NTVs. Unfortunately, empirical results are often controversial and fragmented. To get a more integrated picture of what factors lead to the success or failure of new technology ventures, we conducted a meta‐analysis to examine the success factors in NTVs. We culled the academic literature to collect data from existing empirical studies. Using Pearson correlations as effect size statistics, we conducted a meta‐analysis to analyze the findings of 31 studies and identified the 24 most widely researched success factors for NTVs. After correcting for artifacts and sample size effects, we found that among the 24 possible success factors identified in the literature, 8 are homogeneous significant success factors for NTVs (i.e., they are homogeneous positive significant metafactors that are correlated to venture performance): (1) supply chain integration; (2) market scope; (3) firm age; (4) size of founding team; (5) financial resources; (6) founders' marketing experience; (7) founders' industry experience; and (8) existence of patent protection. Of the original 24 success factors, 5 were not significant: (1) founders' research and development (R&D) experience; (2) founders' experience with start‐ups; (3) environmental dynamism; (4) environmental heterogeneity; and (5) competition intensity. The remaining 11 success factors are heterogeneous. For those heterogeneous success factors, we conducted a moderator analysis. Of this set, three appeared to be success factors, and two were failure factors for subgroups within the NTVs' population. To facilitate the development of a body of knowledge in technology entrepreneurship, this study also identifies high‐quality measurement scales for future research. The article concludes with future research directions.     

Determinants of the Level of Knowledge Application: A Knowledge‐Based and Information‐Processing Perspective*

Knowledge application is of key importance in the development of successful new products. Knowledge application refers to an organization's timely response to technological change by utilizing the knowledge and technology generated into new products and processes. This study uses the knowledge‐based theory of the firm and considers its roots in the information‐processing approach to organization theory to identify and structure potential antecedents of knowledge application. This study develops four hypotheses concerning antecedents of knowledge application. The hypotheses are tested using data collected from 277 high‐technology firms. Empirical results indicate that a long‐term orientation supported by a research and development (R&D) budget, formal rewards, and information technology directly increases the level of knowledge application, while R&D co‐location indirectly increases the level of knowledge application. It is surprising to find that an increase in the level of organizational redundancy reduces the level of knowledge application. The findings also suggest that information technologies, lead‐user, and supplier networks do not appear to significantly influence organizational redundancy.     

How Relevant Is Government Championing Behavior in Technology Development?

Many studies emphasize the importance of government support in technology development. However, this study is among the first to provide empirical findings of the relevance of government roles for the performance of technology development projects. Based on earlier research and the strategic management literature, a theoretical model and hypotheses are developed to study the relevance of government roles and project teams' strategic behavior for technology development projects. Our results show that government championship is an important positive factor for the performance of technology development projects. Government championing behavior overcomes regulatory barriers, enthusiastically promotes the technology's advantages, and gets key decision makers involved. As such, government championship has more impact than government financial/technical assistance on both project performance and benefits to customers. The findings also show that both the proactiveness and defensiveness dimensions of project teams' strategic behavior contribute positively to project performance and benefits to customers. The paper concludes with implications for practice: From a policy perspective, government should extend its technology policies by taking on the role as a champion, while companies should invest in building professional relations with champions in government.