It is widely recognized that new product development (NPD) is a highly interdependent process, yet efforts to empirically model the interdependence and examine its effect on firm performance are scarce. Our study addresses this research gap. We model firms’ abilities to collectively collaborate with suppliers, customers, and internal employee teams in NPD as collaborative competence and examine its impact on project and market performance. Using responses collected from 189 NPD managers, we find empirical evidence for collaborative competence and its differential impact on project and market performance. Specifically, we find that collaborative competence has a direct impact on project performance, but its impact on market performance is indirect, mediated through project performance. The results have significant managerial implications; achieving superior market performance from inter‐ and intra‐organizational involvement is contingent on achieving superior project performance, and companies that fail to achieve desired project performance outcomes will also fail in achieving market performance goals.

I nnovation contests are increasingly adopting a format where submissions are viewable by all contestants and the information structure changes during the contest. In such an "unblind" format, contestants must weigh the costs of revealing their submissions against the benefits of improving their submissions through emerging information. We take a closer look at how contestants solve problems in innovation contests with public submission of solutions-that is, unblind contests, by examining the implications of their submission behavior for contest outcomes. We analyze the submission behavior in terms of three dimensions: the position of first submission by the contestant, the number of submissions the contestant makes, and the length of active participation by the contestant. The econometric analysis of a large dataset of unblind innovation contests and participating contestants indicates that, despite the potential for free riding and intellectual property loss from disclosure of submissions, contestants who have a lower position of first submission are more likely to succeed in the contest. Further, we find some evidence of a curvilinear relationship between a contestant's number of submissions and her likelihood of success, indicating a potential "quality-quantity" trade-off in unblind innovation contests. Finally, our findings indicate that increasing the length of participation in a contest has a positive effect on a contestant's likelihood of success. Departing from prior studies on innovation contests, where a contestant's success is assumed to be a function of her prior experience and problem-solving skills, our study provides new empirical evidence that, in innovation contests with public submissions, the submission behavior of a contestant also plays an explanatory role in a contestant's success.

Please cite this article in press as: Bockstedt, J., et al., Problem-solving effort and success in innovation contests: The role of national wealth and national culture. J. Operations Manage. (2015), http://dx. a b s t r a c tInnovation contests allow firms to harness specialized skills and services from globally dispersed participants for solutions to business problems. Such contests provide a rich setting for operations management (OM) scholars to explore problem solving in global labor markets as firms continue to unbundle their innovation value chains. In this study, we examine the implications of specific types of diversity in innovation contests on problem-solving effort and success. First, we conceptualize diversity among contestants in terms of national wealth (measured as gross domestic product per capita (GDPP) adjusted for purchasing power parity) and national culture (measured using the culture dimensions of performance orientation and uncertainty avoidance) and examine how such factors influence problem-solving effort. Next, we examine how differences between contestants and contest holders in terms of the above factors influence contest outcomes. Using data from a popular online innovation contest platform and countrylevel archival data, we find that contestants from countries with lower levels of GDPP are more likely to exert greater problem-solving effort compared to other contestants. With regard to national culture, we find that performance orientation and uncertainty avoidance have positive and negative effects, respectively, each of which weakens with increasing levels of GDPP. Finally, our analysis provides evidence of homophily effects indicating that contestants who share greater similarities with the contest holder in terms of national wealth and national culture are more likely to be successful in a contest. We discuss the implications of the study's findings for contest holders and platform owners who organize innovation contests, and for emerging research on innovation contests.