Exploring the Knowledge Space Through Project-Based Sourcing

Only recently has open innovation research emphasized the relevance of adopting a project-level contingency approach for explaining inbound sourcing choices. Our research aims to add to this issue by providing new insights on the knowledge-based determinants of sourcing decisions at the project level of analysis. We maintain that a new product development (NPD) project can be conceived as a strategic means not only to explore the knowledge space for the identification of high-valuesolutions,butalsotosearchthesourcesthatenablethefirmtodevelop the specific knowledge features. We suggest that the knowledge space explored by an NPDprojectisgroundedonthemainelementsofanindustrialinnovationsystemand thatitischaracterizedbytwokeydimensions,namelyknowledgenovelty,theknowl- edge space of the performance features of a product that meet new customer needs, and knowledge breadth, the knowledge space of technological domains to draw on for solving product-related problems. Our research is implemented on a sample of NPDprojectscarriedoutbyagroupofleadingItalianfirms,operatinginthemachine tool industry. Findings show that in companies which define sourcing on a project- by-project basis, projects that explore at the frontier of either novel product features or heterogeneous technological domains, spur firms to rely on external sources and tochooseR&Ddevelopmentagreementsasthegovernanceformtoinvolvepartners. Moreover, a high degree of knowledge novelty induces firms to search cognitive dis- tant partners instead of similar ones. Proposing a project-based approach to strategi-

[1]  R. Narula,et al.  Innovating through strategic alliances: moving towards international partnerships and contractual agreements , 1999 .

[2]  T. Minshall,et al.  How do large multinational companies implement open innovation , 2011 .

[3]  Ming-Je Tang,et al.  Vertical integration and innovative performance: The effects of external knowledge sourcing modes , 2010 .

[4]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  Structure-Mapping: A Theoretical Framework for Analogy , 1983, Cogn. Sci..

[5]  Orietta Marsili,et al.  ‘Inequality’ of innovation: skewed distributions and the returns to innovation in Dutch manufacturing , 2005 .

[6]  B. Tether Who co-operates for innovation, and why: An empirical analysis , 2002 .

[7]  Victor P. Seidel Concept Shifting and the Radical Product Development Process , 2007 .

[8]  Jeffrey T. Macher Technological Development and the Boundaries of the Firm: A Knowledge-Based Examination in Semiconductor Manufacturing , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[9]  Qing Wang,et al.  Complexity and the functions of the firm : breadth and depth , 2000 .

[10]  R. Boschma Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment , 2005 .

[11]  Bj⊘rn Asheim,et al.  Knowledge bases and Regional Innovation Systems: Comparing Nordic Clusters. , 2005 .

[12]  M. Freel,et al.  Sectoral patterns of small firm innovation, networking and proximity , 2003 .

[13]  V. Parida,et al.  Inbound Open Innovation Activities in High‐Tech SMEs: The Impact on Innovation Performance , 2012 .

[14]  F. Kodama Technology fusion and the new R & D: Harvard Business Review, 70 (4), 70–78 (July/August 1992) , 1993 .

[15]  Kevin G. Corley,et al.  Building Better Theory by Bridging the Quantitative-Qualitative Divide , 2006 .

[16]  Stefano Brusoni,et al.  Making Design Rules: A Multi-Domain Perspective , 2005 .

[17]  C. Baden‐Fuller,et al.  The Influence of Technological Knowledge Base and Organizational Structure on Technology Collaboration , 2010 .

[18]  Jeffrey Cummings,et al.  Best-fit Alliance Partners: The Use of Critical Success Factors in a Comprehensive Partner Selection Process , 2012 .

[19]  Jack A. Nickerson,et al.  A Knowledge-based Theory of the Firm - A Problem-solving Perspective , 2004, Organ. Sci..

[20]  Nabil Amara,et al.  Learning and novelty of innovation in established manufacturing SMEs , 2008 .

[21]  Poh Kam Wong,et al.  Types of technology sourcing and innovative capability: An exploratory study of Singapore manufacturing firms , 2005 .

[22]  Reinhilde Veugelers,et al.  In Search of Complementarity in Innovation Strategy: Internal R&D and External Knowledge Acquisition , 2006, Manag. Sci..

[23]  Kuen-Hung Tsai,et al.  Collaborative networks and product innovation performance: Toward a contingency perspective , 2009 .

[24]  H. Chesbrough Open Business Models: How to Thrive in the New Innovation Landscape , 2006 .

[25]  Sylvain Lenfle,et al.  Exploration and Project Management , 2008 .

[26]  Vareska van de Vrande,et al.  Balancing your technology-sourcing portfolio: How sourcing mode diversity enhances innovative performance , 2013 .

[27]  R. Martin,et al.  Leave‐K‐Out Diagnostics for Time Series , 1989 .

[28]  F. Malerba Sectoral systems of innovation: a framework for linking innovation to the knowledge base, structure and dynamics of sectors , 2005 .

[29]  Henry Chesbrough,et al.  Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology , 2003 .

[30]  Kuo-Nan Hsieh,et al.  Open versus closed new service development: the influences of project novelty , 2012 .

[31]  Andrew B. Hargadon,et al.  Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. , 1997 .

[32]  Philip Shapira,et al.  Machine Tools: The Remaking of a Traditional Sectoral Innovation System , 2004 .

[33]  D. Dahl,et al.  The Influence and Value of Analogical Thinking during New Product Ideation , 2002 .

[34]  Stefano Brusoni,et al.  New combinations in old industries: the introduction of radical innovations in tire manufacturing , 2007 .

[35]  Brian Squire,et al.  A CONTINGENT PERSPECTIVE OF OPEN INNOVATION IN NEW PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS , 2010 .

[36]  Eric H. Kessler,et al.  Internal Vs. External Learning In New Product Development: Effects On Speed, Costs And Competitive Advantage , 2000 .

[37]  A. Salter,et al.  Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaining innovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms , 2006 .

[38]  Sabine Brunswicker,et al.  CROSSING HORIZONS: LEVERAGING CROSS-INDUSTRY INNOVATION SEARCH IN THE FRONT-END OF THE INNOVATION PROCESS , 2010 .

[39]  G. O'Connor Market learning and radical innovation: A cross case comparison of eight radical innovation projects , 1998 .

[40]  Stephen J. Carson,et al.  Uncertainty, Opportunism and Governance: The Effects of Volatility and Ambiguity on Formal and Relational Contracting , 2006 .

[41]  F. Malerba Sectoral systems of innovation and production , 2002 .

[42]  Patricia E. Tweet Brokerage and Closure: An Introduction to Social Capital , 2006 .

[43]  A. Gambardella,et al.  Does technological convergence imply convergence in markets? Evidence from the electronics industry , 1998 .

[44]  Daniel A. Levinthal,et al.  ABSORPTIVE CAPACITY: A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON LEARNING AND INNOVATION , 1990 .

[45]  D. Freddi The integration of old and new technological paradigms in low- and medium-tech sectors: The case of mechatronics , 2009 .

[46]  C. A. Benavides-Velasco,et al.  Innovative competence, exploration and exploitation: The influence of technological diversification , 2008 .

[47]  Laura B. Cardinal,et al.  RETROSPECTIVE REPORTS IN ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH: A REEXAMINATION OF RECENT EVIDENCE , 1997 .

[48]  O. Gassmann,et al.  The Future of Open Innovation , 2010 .

[49]  P. M. Podsakoff,et al.  Self-Reports in Organizational Research: Problems and Prospects , 1986 .

[50]  Salvatore Torrisi,et al.  Technological exploration through licensing: new insights from the licensee’s point of view , 2010 .

[51]  R. Gulati,et al.  The Nature of Partnering Experience and the Gains from Alliances , 2009 .

[52]  Cornelius Herstatt,et al.  Developing Innovations Based on Analogies: Experience from Design and Engineering Consultants , 2010 .

[53]  Anna Comacchio,et al.  Cooperative Markets for Ideas: When does Technology Licensing Combine with R&D Partnerships? , 2012 .

[54]  S. Dopson,et al.  When Does Search Openness Really Matter? A Contingency Study of Health‐Care Innovation Projects , 2013 .

[55]  Ronald V. Kalafsky,et al.  The Technological Revitalization of a Mature US Industry: The Case of Machine Tools , 2003 .

[56]  M. Carree,et al.  Heterogeneity in R&D cooperation strategies , 2004 .

[57]  Kim B. Clark,et al.  Architectural Innovation: The Reconfiguration of Existing Product Technologies and the Failure of , 1990 .

[58]  Yu-An Huang,et al.  R&D sourcing strategies: Determinants and consequences , 2009 .

[59]  B. Looy,et al.  Interorganizational collaboration and innovation: Toward a portfolio approach , 2005 .

[60]  R. Veugelers Internal R & D expenditures and external technology sourcing , 1997 .

[61]  David C. Mowery,et al.  Sources of Industrial Leadership , 1999 .

[62]  M. Ivimey Annual report , 1958, IRE Transactions on Engineering Writing and Speech.

[63]  M. Hobday The Project-Based Organisation: An ideal form for managing complex products and systems? , 2000 .

[64]  F. Rothaermel,et al.  Old technology meets new technology: complementarities, similarities, and alliance formation , 2008 .

[65]  A. Zaheer,et al.  Bridging ties: a source of firm heterogeneity in competitive capabilities , 1999 .

[66]  R. Katila,et al.  Something Old, Something New: A Longitudinal Study of Search Behavior and New Product Introduction , 2002 .

[67]  Lars Huemer,et al.  Trustworthiness, Risk, and the Transfer of Tacit and Explicit Knowledge between Alliance Partners , 2008 .

[68]  R. Veugelers,et al.  COMPLEMENTARITY BETWEEN TECHNOLOGY MAKE AND BUY IN INNOVATION STRATEGIES : EVIDENCE FROM BELGIAN MANUFACTURING FIRMS , 1998 .

[69]  D. Choi,et al.  Patterns of strategy innovation , 2001 .

[70]  T. S. Robertson,et al.  TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT MODE: A TRANSACTION COST CONCEPTUALIZATION , 1998 .

[71]  Eric von Hippel,et al.  Transfers of user process innovations to process equipment producers: A study of Dutch high-tech firms , 2009 .

[72]  V. Chiesa,et al.  Unravelling the Process from Closed to Open Innovation: Evidence from Mature, Asset-Intensive Industries , 2010 .

[73]  Lee Fleming,et al.  Navigating the Technology Landscape of Innovation , 2003 .

[74]  O. Gassmann,et al.  Creative Imitation: Exploring the Case of Cross-Industry Innovation , 2010 .

[75]  M. Knudsen,et al.  Some immediate – but negative – effects of openness on product development performance , 2011 .

[76]  Jing Zhang,et al.  Technological Knowledge Base, R&D Organization Structure and Alliance Formation: Evidence from the Biopharmaceutical Industry , 2007 .

[77]  Wendy K. Smith,et al.  Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams , 2005 .

[78]  F. Malerba Sectoral Systems of Innovation: Concepts, Issues and Analyses of Six Major Sectors in Europe , 2009 .

[79]  Terry L. Amburgey,et al.  Staying Local or Reaching Globally? Analyzing Structural Characteristics of Project-Based Networks in German Biotech , 2011 .

[80]  G. George,et al.  Entry into Insular Domains: A Longitudinal Study of Knowledge Structuration and Innovation in Biotechnology Firms , 2008 .

[81]  Erwin Danneels,et al.  Product innovativeness from the firm's perspective: Its dimensions and their relation with project selection and performance , 2001 .

[82]  Wim Vanhaverbeke,et al.  External technology sourcing: The effect of uncertainty on governance mode choice , 2007 .

[83]  HERBERT A. SIMON,et al.  The Architecture of Complexity , 1991 .

[84]  E. Zajac,et al.  FROM TRANSACTION COST TO TRANSACTIONAL VALUE ANALYSIS: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE STUDY OF INTERORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGIES* , 1993 .

[85]  G. Duysters,et al.  Networking as a Means to Strategy Change: The Case of Open Innovation in Mobile Telephony , 2007 .

[86]  Bart Nooteboom,et al.  Optimal Cognitive Distance and Absorptive Capacity , 2005 .

[87]  Claudio Pizzi,et al.  Technology sourcing decisions in exploratory projects , 2011 .

[88]  Michael Fritsch,et al.  Who cooperates on R&D? , 2001 .

[89]  Liang-Chih Chen,et al.  Learning through informal local and global linkages: The case of Taiwan's machine tool industry , 2009 .

[90]  Jeroen P.J. de Jong,et al.  Market novelty, competence-seeking and innovation networking , 2009 .

[91]  D. Third OECD/Eurostat . Oslo Manual-Guidelines for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Paris, France: , 2005 .

[92]  M. Mol,et al.  Does Being R&D Intensive Still Discourage Outsourcing? Evidence from Dutch Manufacturing , 2005 .

[93]  Maria Chiara Di Guardo,et al.  Organizing links with science: Cooperate or contract?: A project-level analysis , 2010 .

[94]  D. Mowery,et al.  Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: implications for the resource-based view of the firm , 1998 .

[95]  K. Pavitt Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change : Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory : Research Policy , 1984 .

[96]  Jonas Söderlund,et al.  Relating, reflecting and routinizing: Developing project competence in cooperation with others , 2008 .

[97]  Sebastian Spaeth,et al.  How constraints and knowledge impact open innovation , 2013 .

[98]  A. Teixeira,et al.  International R&D Cooperation between Low-tech SMEs: The Role of Cultural and Geographical Proximity , 2008 .

[99]  Oliver Gassmann,et al.  Opening Up the Solution Space: The Role of Analogical Thinking for Breakthrough Product Innovation , 2008 .

[100]  Francesco Lissoni,et al.  Knowledge codification and the geography of innovation: the case of Brescia mechanical cluster , 2001 .

[101]  Helle Alsted Søndergaard,et al.  Sources of innovation, their combinations and strengths - benefits at the NPD project level , 2013, Int. J. Technol. Manag..

[102]  Paul L. Robertson,et al.  Receptive Capacity of Established Industries as a Limiting Factor in the Economy's Rate of Innovation¹ , 2003 .

[103]  Yi Xu,et al.  Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving , 2008, Manag. Sci..

[104]  Jens Leker,et al.  Industry Convergence and its Implications for the Front End of Innovation: A Problem of Absorptive Capacity , 2007 .