Calling It Quits: A Behavioral Perspective on Exploration and Exploitation in R&D Project Termination

IF 10.1 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
Journal of Operations Management Pub Date : 2026-04-02 Epub Date: 2026-02-09 DOI:10.1002/joom.70034
Fei Li, Matthew Semadeni, Tyson R. Browning
{"title":"Calling It Quits: A Behavioral Perspective on Exploration and Exploitation in R&D Project Termination","authors":"Fei Li,&nbsp;Matthew Semadeni,&nbsp;Tyson R. Browning","doi":"10.1002/joom.70034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Not every R&amp;D project will succeed, necessitating a careful selection of which R&amp;D projects to pursue and which to terminate. Timely termination decisions free up scarce resources for more promising projects. Yet, prior research has yielded inconclusive results on how firms terminate exploratory versus exploitative R&amp;D projects. Given that early-stage R&amp;D project termination is a decision made under high uncertainty, we adopt a behavioral perspective to reconcile the inconsistent findings. We propose that a firm's preference for terminating exploratory versus exploitative projects depends on three sources of contextual feedback: parallel projects, prior collaboration experience, and firm performance. We test our hypotheses using drug development projects from pharmaceutical firms over 11 years, finding that exploratory projects are less likely to be terminated relative to exploitative ones when the number of parallel projects is limited, when they are conducted with an existing partner, or when firm performance falls below aspiration.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":51097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operations Management","volume":"72 3","pages":"417-438"},"PeriodicalIF":10.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Operations Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joom.70034","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/2/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Not every R&D project will succeed, necessitating a careful selection of which R&D projects to pursue and which to terminate. Timely termination decisions free up scarce resources for more promising projects. Yet, prior research has yielded inconclusive results on how firms terminate exploratory versus exploitative R&D projects. Given that early-stage R&D project termination is a decision made under high uncertainty, we adopt a behavioral perspective to reconcile the inconsistent findings. We propose that a firm's preference for terminating exploratory versus exploitative projects depends on three sources of contextual feedback: parallel projects, prior collaboration experience, and firm performance. We test our hypotheses using drug development projects from pharmaceutical firms over 11 years, finding that exploratory projects are less likely to be terminated relative to exploitative ones when the number of parallel projects is limited, when they are conducted with an existing partner, or when firm performance falls below aspiration.

退出:R&D项目终止中的探索与开发行为视角
并不是每个研发项目都会成功,因此需要仔细选择哪些研发项目继续进行,哪些项目终止。及时的终止决定可以为更有前途的项目释放稀缺的资源。然而,先前的研究在企业如何终止探索性和开发性研发项目方面没有得出结论性的结果。鉴于早期研发项目终止是在高度不确定的情况下做出的决定,我们采用行为视角来调和不一致的发现。我们提出,企业对终止探索性项目和开发性项目的偏好取决于三个上下文反馈来源:并行项目、先前的合作经验和企业绩效。我们使用制药公司超过11年的药物开发项目来检验我们的假设,发现当并行项目数量有限时,当它们与现有合作伙伴一起进行时,或者当公司业绩低于预期时,探索性项目相对于剥削性项目更不可能终止。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Operations Management
Journal of Operations Management 管理科学-运筹学与管理科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
62
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Operations Management (JOM) is a leading academic publication dedicated to advancing the field of operations management (OM) through rigorous and original research. The journal's primary audience is the academic community, although it also values contributions that attract the interest of practitioners. However, it does not publish articles that are primarily aimed at practitioners, as academic relevance is a fundamental requirement. JOM focuses on the management aspects of various types of operations, including manufacturing, service, and supply chain operations. The journal's scope is broad, covering both profit-oriented and non-profit organizations. The core criterion for publication is that the research question must be centered around operations management, rather than merely using operations as a context. For instance, a study on charismatic leadership in a manufacturing setting would only be within JOM's scope if it directly relates to the management of operations; the mere setting of the study is not enough. Published papers in JOM are expected to address real-world operational questions and challenges. While not all research must be driven by practical concerns, there must be a credible link to practice that is considered from the outset of the research, not as an afterthought. Authors are cautioned against assuming that academic knowledge can be easily translated into practical applications without proper justification. JOM's articles are abstracted and indexed by several prestigious databases and services, including Engineering Information, Inc.; Executive Sciences Institute; INSPEC; International Abstracts in Operations Research; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; SciSearch/Science Citation Index; CompuMath Citation Index; Current Contents/Engineering, Computing & Technology; Information Access Company; and Social Sciences Citation Index. This ensures that the journal's research is widely accessible and recognized within the academic and professional communities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书