Firms often procure the same input via multiple means, e.g., making and buying. Recent papers have yielded rich, but inconsistent, theoretical and empirical insights. Resolving these inconsistencies requires reconceptualizing two aspects of plural sourcing: what and how. We reconceptualize plural sourcing as a set of combined governance modes—make‐and‐buy, make‐and‐ally, and buy‐and‐ally—which differ in their capabilities and limitations. We demonstrate our reconceptualization's potential with propositions predicting the choice of specific plural sourcing modes. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

The last decade has seen a remarkable opening of new job opportunities for people who are neurodiversea subset of the general population that historically has experienced un-and underemployment rates as high as 85-90% (Roux et al., 2015;Taylor & Seltzer, 2011). Neurodiversity takes neurological developments traditionally regarded as atypical or even as diagnosable disorders, such as autism or dyslexia, and conceptualizes them as normal human variation (Jaarsma & Welin, 2012). Proponents of this perspective suggest that many neurodiverse people possess useful talents and are capable of functioning productively in organizations, but are barred from work opportunities because they are, as exemplars of human variation, 'at the edges of the bell curve' (Robison, 2013). The problem, according to this view, is not with neurodiverse people, but with hiring processes that define talent too narrowly, and especially with reliance on job interviews, which are biased against people with atypical manners of interaction. This view accords with early criticisms of employment perspectives viewing diversity as 'the problem' rather than the problem as inappropriate management of diversity (see Härtel & Fujimoto, 2000). Despite slow uptake of this alternative inclusive view of diversity, its validity is being established with prominent companies, such as SAP, Microsoft, DXC Technology, EY, JP Morgan Chase, and Ford, implementing since 2013 employment initiatives that de-emphasize interviews in favor of new inclusive recruiting approaches that have led to celebrated successes in hiring neurodiverse people. In this special issue, we examine some of the primary benefits that firms have realized as well as the challenges they encountered along the way, underscoring the urgent need for researchers and practitioners alike to identify how employment practices can be transformed to be inclusive for all individuals (cf. Härtel & Ashkanasy, 2011). In this special issue and our introduction to it, we look at the benefits of these new initiatives to the individual, as well as their societal and potential firm or business benefits.From the perspective of individuals, work is an integral part of life, providing individuals both economic security and the context in which they can contribute their talents and skills to society and thus anchor themselves in a social role (Saleh & Bruyere, 2018). Research shows that having a job is an important determinant of self-esteem and provides a critical link between an individual and society (Doyle, Kavanagh, Metcalfe, & Lavin, 2005). The World Health Organization (WHO) affirms this idea, proclaiming that 'although it is difficult to quantify the impact of work alone on personal identity, self-esteem and social recognition, most mental health professionals agree that the workplace environment can have a significant impact on an individual's mental well-being' (Harnois & Gabriel, 2000: 5). The WHO recognizes that employment provides time structure, social contact, collective effort and purpose, social identity...

No abstract

Previous research on complementarity of research and development (R&D) has generated inconsistent results and focused predominantly on product innovations, neglecting process innovations. Although process innovations are important for firm efficiency, growth, and performance, little is known about complementarity of internal and external R&D activities in process innovations. Because of the different characteristics of knowledge involved in product versus process innovations, firms should benefit less from complementing internal with external R&D for process innovations than product innovations in terms of knowledge creation but should at the same time be less prone to the risks of unwanted knowledge transfer. Our empirical analysis of cross-sectional firm-level data of the German manufacturing sector from 2001, 2005, and 2009 comprises a direct complementarity test for product versus process innovations. The results confirm previous evidence for significant complementarities between internal and external R&D for product innovations but find limited existence of complementarity for process innovations. As implication for R&D management, our study highlights the differences between process and product innovations and how they translate into differences in complementarity of internal and external R&D activities.

With the rapid advancement of innovative technology, coupled with IT being a core function in contemporary business, there has been an upward trend of multi-national companies (MNCs) reporting a skill deficit in areas such as data analytics and cybersecurity (Columbus, 2017. IBM predicts demand for data scientists will soar 28% By 2020. Forbes; NeSmith, 2018. The cybersecurity gap is an industry crisis. Forbes). In a recent survey with over 3,000 CIOs, 65% indicated their organizations were unable to maintain par with the progression of technology in areas such as data analytics and security due to a lack of adequate talent (Harvey Nash & KPMG, 2018. CIO survey 2018). Although, organizations have recently started to expand their talent pipeline following a neurological breakthrough: research as well as anecdotal evidence suggests adults with mild forms of autism display above-average intelligence, increased attention focus, and high visual–spatial abilities; a combination in high market demand for roles such as software testing, data analysis, cybersecurity, and engineering due to their uncanny ability with pattern recognition, information processing, analytics, and attention to detail.These auspicious developments come at the helm of an increasing rate of governments around the world implementing provisions to their labour regulations towards equitable hiring of people with disabilities (Myors et al., 2017. Perspectives from 22 countries on the legal environment for selection. Handbook of Employee Selection. 659–677. Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School of Business.). Some, such as France, Japan, Kenya, Korea, and Taiwan, have gone so far as to set quota targets (Myors et al., 2017. Perspectives from 22 countries on the legal environment for selection. Handbook of Employee Selection. 659–677. Research Collection Lee Kong Chian School of Business.). The implication for organizations is that they need to develop disability-inclusive recruitment and selection systems along with work designs and environments that are disability friendly. But what does this mean in practice? What does a disability-inclusive recruitment and selection system look like?Enter DXC Technology (DXC): born out of a merger between global conglomerate Computer Science Corporation and Hewlett Packard Enterprise, generating close to $25 billion annually in revenue, with clients across more than 70 countries, they strategically became a pioneer in the digital transformation that was taking place globally. In the wake of the breakthrough in employment diversity, DXC recognized this as an opportunity to gain a critical edge within the increasingly competitive talent pool market. First, design a program of their own for recruiting and selecting adults with high functioning autism. Next, through a collaboration with various universities including the University of Queensland and Macquarie University, Neurodiversity Hubs were established; an initiative designed to assist neurodivergent students with obtaining work experience and internships. In doing so, they faced the following key challenges: How could they design a recruitment and selection strategy for neurodivergent individuals that was equitable, ethical, and efficient? In particular, where could they find suitable neurodivergent candidates, what criteria should they use to select them, and how should they handle unsuccessful candidates to ensure beneficial outcomes for all stakeholders?