Tensions in R&D networks: Implications for knowledge search and integration

Abstract

R&D Networks comprise different actors with various goals and motivations. Thus, such networks are filled with tensions that emerge from simultaneously existing, competing or contradictory organizing elements and demands. In this study, we examine the knowledge search and integration behaviour of firms participating in R&D networks in the Dutch aerospace sector. We find evidence of a multitude of tensions that have implications for knowledge processes of firms and within R&D networks. These tensions are grouped into dialectical and paradoxical tensions. In particular, paradoxical tensions require simultaneous attention to the different organizing elements, while dialectical tensions create either/or situations that need to be carefully managed. We find two types of dialectical tensions: openness of core knowledge exposure and inclusiveness of knowledge sharing behaviour; and three types of paradoxical tensions related to innovation goal alignment, coopetition, and actor interdependence. Overall, our results provide unique insights to how participants of R&D networks perceive tensions involved in knowledge search and integration, how the network role of the actors affects these perceptions, and what types of tension-resolving mechanisms are adopted in different types of networks.

Coopetition and market performance

“…The resource efficiency category involves concrete cost savings and profitability measures and implications. For instance, the literature provides much evidence of the benefits of coopetition for cost savings in upstream activities, such as R&D and manufacturing (Choi et al, 2010;Gnyawali & Park, 2011;Ritala et al, 2017), as well as downstream activities, such as delivery, logistics, branding, and marketing Kotzab & Teller, 2003;Teller et al, 2016). Furthermore, some studies have discussed specifics in terms of the types of resource efficiencies achieved.…”

“…Market performance benefits via coopetition can be achieved by different means. For instance, some firms utilize coopetition to share resources and risks in research and development (R&D), manufacturing or, marketing (Choi et al, 2010;Gnyawali & Park, 2011;Ritala et al, 2017), therefore lowering the costs of the actors involved. Furthermore, some firms have been shown to utilize coopetition-based strategies and business models for global, scalable growth, as in the well-documented case of Amazon.com (Ritala et al, 2014).…”

Organizing for openness: six models for developer involvement in hybrid OSS projects

“…This tension in private-collective interests constitute an ongoing debate in research and development relationships and networks (see e.g. [43]), and managing them is decisive in open innovation communities and projects with diverse stakeholders.…”

Reassembling Local E-Government : A study of actors’ translations of digitalisation in public administration

“…When several related tensions can be observed in a specific policy or implementation process in a network, we can talk of a field of tension. A similar term is 'tension-laden context', mentioned by Ritala et al (2017), or tension-laden process.…”

“…These focus on institutional isomorphism (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983), strategic dualities and contradictions in organisational processes (Smith & Lewis, 2011), dilemmas, dialectics and paradoxes (Birkinshaw, Crilly, Bouquet, & Sun Young, 2016). In a study of R&D networks, Ritala et al (2017) discuss dialectical and paradoxical tensions related to knowledge exchange and network coordination mechanisms. Karlsson and Montin (2013) study goal conflicts in Swedish local governance arrangements.…”