Towards technological rules for designing innovation networks: a dynamic capabilities view

Abstract

Purpose-Interorganizational innovation networks are providing opportunities to exploit superior resources that reside beyond the boundary of the firm. The shifting locus of innovation and value creation away from the 'sole firm as innovator' poses important questions about the nature of resources that exist in the spaces between firms, and the capabilities needed to leverage them for competitive advantage. The purpose of this research is to produce design-oriented knowledge, for configuring interorganizational networks as a means of accessing such resources for innovation. Methodology / Approach-This exploratory investigation conflates emerging constructs and themes analytically induced from a systematic survey of 142 scholarly and practitioner articles and 45 expert interviews with senior professionals operating in the biopharmaceuticals industry. Findings and Practical Implications-The findings identify 7 theoretically and empirically grounded technological rules associated with effective interorganizational networking for innovation. They embody evidence ex post of networking theory and practice. Based on van Aken's seminal work, they comprise vital design-oriented knowledge to provide a solution architecture of viable action options for managers, a priori, to purposefully design innovation networks. Collectively these rules represent a tentative taxonomy, a means of classifying design principles, to assist managers in navigating their decision making processes. Originality/value of paper-This study demonstrates the need for explicit design-oriented knowledge for configuring interorganizational networks. Finally, the implications of the findings for strategic management theory are discussed from a Dynamic Capabilities view. The significance of a dynamic capability which addresses the renewal of network-specific resources is highlighted.

Exploring how complex solution-based capabilities (CSC) are developed and integrated in engineering companies

“…Finally, at the stage of system integration, the system test group, the system integration group and other functions, such as manufacturing, work together to finalise the systems and update specifications accordingly. The whole process is also influenced and shaped by the company's strategic direction and network-based support (Smart, Bessant and Gupta 2007). This re-enforces the view that an innovative and enthusiastic organisation is willing to commit its creativity and energy, and invest in extensive links to include other stakeholders who can help with the knowledge and resource flows.…”

“…Coordination is a central element for developing and integrating complex innovation solutions since many stakeholders are involved in the process, pursuing multiple interests, and influencing the outcomes in the development of integrated solutions 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 (Vezzoli, 2010;Smart, Bessant and Gupta 2007;Michaelides, Morton and Liu 2013). Coordination is seen as individual efforts and the interlinkage of different parts of an organisation to achieve explicit common goals (Blau and Scott, 1962;Van de Ven, Delbecq and Koenig 1976).…”

“…Companies either manage improvement in new product development (Nilsson-Witell et al 2005), enhance internal consistence among their design activities (Spina, Verganti and Zotteri 2002), develop inter-firm networks (Smart, Bessant and Gupta 2007), or create knowledge for sustainable competitive advantages (Sharkie, 2003).…”

“…Others focus on materialising specific innovations, such as New Product Development, Service Innovation and Complex Project Execution, and see problem-solving for customers as a bolt-on process (Spina et al 2002;Nilsson-Witell et al 2005;Smart, Bessant and Gupta 2007;Goffin and New, 2001;Stock and Tatikonda, 2004;Voelpel et al, 2006). This approach tends to consider innovation as performance-oriented.…”

Internal service – barriers, flows and assessment

“…Concern for the end customer is sometimes explicit, such as in lean consumption (see for example Bowen and Youngdahl 1998, George 2007, Womack and Jones 2005 or more often implicit, such as the fit between internal capabilities and customer/market requirements (see for example, Hill and Brown 2007). In terms of inter-organisational operations issues, there are many papers concerned with the various issues associated with supply chain management -such as supplier relations (see for example Howard and Squire 2007), supplier selection (see for example Sarkis et al 2007), and also other inter-organisational coordinating activities such as developing innovation networks (see for example Smart et al 2007) and creating lean supply chains (see for example Lamming 1993).…”