Co-evolution of Firms, Industries and Networks in Space
In: Regional studies: official journal of the Regional Studies Association, Band 45, Heft 7, S. 919-933
ISSN: 1360-0591
6 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Regional studies: official journal of the Regional Studies Association, Band 45, Heft 7, S. 919-933
ISSN: 1360-0591
In: Regional studies, Band 45, Heft 7
ISSN: 0034-3404
In: Organization science, Band 25, Heft 5, S. 1287-1305
ISSN: 1526-5455
To develop innovations in large, mature organizations, individuals often have to resort to underground, "bootleg" research and development (R&D) activities that have no formal organizational support. In doing so, these individuals attempt to achieve greater autonomy over the direction of their R&D efforts and to escape the constraints of organizational accountability. Drawing on theories of proactive creativity and innovation, we argue that these underground R&D efforts help individuals to develop innovations based on the exploration of uncharted territory and delayed assessment of embryonic ideas. After carefully assessing the direction of causality, we find that individuals' bootleg efforts are associated with achievement of high levels of innovative performance. Furthermore, we show that the costs and benefits of bootlegging for innovation are contingent on the emphasis on the enforcement of organizational norms in the individual's work environment; we argue and demonstrate empirically that the benefits of an individual's bootlegging efforts are enhanced in work units with high levels of innovative performance and which include members who are also engaged in bootlegging. However, during periods of organizational change involving formalization of the R&D process, individuals who increase their bootlegging activities are less likely to innovate. We explore the implications of these findings for our understanding of proactive and deviant creativity.
In: Administrative science quarterly: ASQ, Band 65, Heft 4, S. 887-930
ISSN: 1930-3815
Organizations typically employ a division of labor between specialist creator roles and generalist business roles in a bid to orchestrate innovation. We seek to determine the extent to which individuals dividing the work across roles can also benefit from dividing their network. We argue that collaborating individuals benefit from connecting to the same groups but different individuals within those groups—an approach we label dual networking—rather than from a pure divide-and-conquer approach. To test this argument, we study a dual career-ladder setting in a large multinational in which R&D managers and technologists partner up in their quest for innovation. We find that collaborators who engage in dual networking attain an innovation performance advantage over those who connect to distinct groups. This advantage stems from the opportunity to engage in the dual interpretation of input the partners receive, as well as from dual influencing that helps them to gain momentum for their proposed innovations, and it leads to more effective elaboration and championing of their ideas. In demonstrating these effects, we advance understanding of how collaborators organize their networking activities to best achieve innovative outcomes.
In: Science and public policy: journal of the Science Policy Foundation, Band 42, Heft 4, S. 530-548
ISSN: 1471-5430
In: Industry and Innovation, 2017, Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages 8-40, DOI: 10.1080/13662716.2016.1240068
SSRN
Working paper