Knowledge diversity and coordination: The effect of intrafirm inventor task networks on absorption speed

Moreira, Solon; Markus, Arjan; Laursen, Keld

doi:10.1002/smj.2914

Cited by 79 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 91 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The sociology of innovation has shown that inventor networks play an important role in shaping innovative activity and output (Guler & Nerkar, 2012; Moreira, Markus, & Laursen, 2018; Obstfeld, 2005; Reagans & Zuckerman, 2001). Although changes in network structures are little studied in this literature, research on authority, incentives and within‐firm social capital suggest that changes in formal R&D structure should affect network structure.…”

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational change and the dynamics of innovation: Formal R&D structure and intrafirm inventor networks

Argyres

Rios

Silverman

2020

Strategic Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research has argued and shown that firms with more centralized R&D produce broader innovations, but the organizational mechanisms underlying this relationship are underexplored. This gap limits our understanding of whether and how formal R&D structure can be used as a lever to influence research outcomes. To address this question, we study the relationship between formal R&D structure, internal inventor networks, and innovative behavior and outcomes. We find that centralization of R&D budget authority increases the connectedness of internal inventor networks, which in turn increases the breadth of both innovation impact and technological search. Surprisingly, decentralization does not have the opposite effect. Our results suggest that changes in formal structure influence innovation outcomes through changes in inventor networks, with a lag reflecting organizational inertia.

show abstract

Section: Theory and Hypothesesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organizational change and the dynamics of innovation: Formal R&D structure and intrafirm inventor networks

Argyres

Rios

Silverman

2020

Strategic Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These studies suggested that, on the one hand, different types of organizational ecosystems and environments (e.g., employee turnover, technology change, or extreme events) are shift parameters for exploration learning and exploitation. However, we need to better understand when exploitation and exploration occur and how they impact ( Paruchuri and Awate, 2017 ; Moreira et al, 2018 ). On the other hand, the negative factors surrounding the organization’s learning are not always harmful to organizational performance.…”

Section: Theoretical Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

THE Impact of Disruption on the Relationship Between Exploitation, Exploration, and Organizational Adaptation

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Firms should deploy exploration and exploitation to foster organizational adaptation. Previous research on exploration and exploitation lacked a focus on disruption implications in different contexts. This study aims to empirically test a moderation model including disruption events, exploration, exploitation, and organizational adaptation and enable a deeper understanding of organizational learning and innovation theory to yield competitive advantage and sustainability of innovative firms. Our results reveal that exploration is more effective during outside disruption events. The results do not support the concept that exploitation is more effective during inside disruptions. Disruptions also moderate the combined effect of exploration and exploitation. Although they are generally complementary in facilitating organizational adaptation, a singular focus on either exploration or exploitation is as effective as is combining exploration and exploitation during inside and outside disruption events. The results of an event study using seven Chinese international firms, including Alibaba, Meituan, Dianping, Baidu, Beibei, TP-link, and Maxio, provided 132 completed and usable questionnaires that supported our hypotheses. Our study contributes to a better understanding of disruption, exploration, exploitation, and related performance implications.

show abstract

“…As a consequence, IPRs associated with international outsourcing might be more difficult to define than IPRs from national outsourcing. The reason is that it is more difficult to transmit personal knowledge between geographically distant groups than between closer groups (Kogut & Zander, 1992; Moreira et al, 2018; Teece, 1981). 6 Therefore, adding highly skilled experts and monitoring staff needed to deal with IPR definitions involved in international R&D outsourcing might facilitate solving communication problems that may arise with domestic providers to identify and clarify ownership.…”

Section: Cross‐effects Between National and International Randd Outsourcingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Organization of R&D outsourcing: Asymmetric cross‐effects between locations

García‐Vega

Huergo

2021

Economics Manag Strategy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When companies acquire R&D from external national providers, would they benefit if they also acquired knowledge from foreign providers? And the other way around? These questions are important for the organization of firm knowledge‐based activies and R&D governance. In this paper, we try to answer these questions by empirically examining the cross‐effects of international and national R&D outsourcing to generate innovation. Using a panel database of about 10,000 Spanish firms, we show that there is asymmetry in the effectiveness of the combined adoption of R&D outsourcing locations: international R&D outsourcing reinforces national R&D outsourcing, but national outsourcing does not reinforce international outsourcing. Therefore, the order of adoption matters; that is, on average, companies are more innovative if they acquire R&D first from external domestic providers and afterwards from foreign providers. We also find that the mechanism for these effects is related to organizational and management changes in sharing responsibilities and decision‐making.

show abstract

Knowledge diversity and coordination: The effect of intrafirm inventor task networks on absorption speed

Cited by 79 publications

References 91 publications

Organizational change and the dynamics of innovation: Formal R&D structure and intrafirm inventor networks

Organizational change and the dynamics of innovation: Formal R&D structure and intrafirm inventor networks

THE Impact of Disruption on the Relationship Between Exploitation, Exploration, and Organizational Adaptation

Organization of R&D outsourcing: Asymmetric cross‐effects between locations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About