Product Innovation eJournal最新文献

{"title":"Stakeholder Orientation and Operations Outcomes: Evidence from Constituency Statutes","authors":"K. Aral, Erasmo Giambona, L. V. Van Wassenhove","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3680127","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3680127","url":null,"abstract":"We study the effect of stakeholder orientation on operations decisions. For identification, we exploit a quasi-natural experiment that effectively reduced potential personal costs for executives pursuing stakeholder-oriented decisions, the staggered adoption of constituency statutes. Using a staggered difference-in-difference approach, we find that firms incorporated in constituency states (treated firms) are 15.9 percentage points (pp) more likely to hire a chief operating officer (COO) relative to firms in non-constituency states (control firms) post reform. We also find that treated firms engage more in operational decisions discussions and increase operational investments post reform. Importantly, a structural two-stage least squares approach reveals that these changes in operational decisions, operational investments, and COO hiring contribute to increasing firm value by 17.2%, 12.6%, and 9.3%, respectively. We further find that the chief executive officers of treated firms are less likely to be fired relative to control firms post reform. Altogether, our results suggest that constituency statutes lead to higher firm value by allowing executives to implement stakeholder-oriented operational decisions that were potentially personally too costly for them pre reform. To our best knowledge, our study is the first to identify a clear economic mechanism (i.e., the enlarged decision space for executives following the reform) through which stakeholder orientation, by affecting operations decisions, contributes to firm value. Our work contributes to the sustainable operations literature by identifying the separation between shareholders and managers as a fundamental determinant of responsible operations. Interestingly, while constituency statutes were intended to protect executives adopting stakeholder-oriented policies from shareholders’ sanctions, our findings suggest that these statutes benefited not only executives and non-equity stakeholders, but also shareholders. More broadly, our results indicate that policymakers need to assess the implications of regulatory changes beyond the targeted constituencies. Importantly, shareholders should recognize managerial freedom in operations decisions as an important value driver.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127921290","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Does FDI Induce Knowledge Spillovers? Evidence from Indian Pharmaceutical Industry","authors":"Ramesh Jangili, Rajendra Kumar N.R.V.V.M.K., S. N.","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3847528","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3847528","url":null,"abstract":"The study examines knowledge spillovers from multinational firms in the Indian pharmaceutical industry. Specifically, we examine whether FDI catalyses diffusion of knowledge transfer from multinational firms’ R&D activities during 2000-01 to 2019-20 and four sub-periods of five years each. The empirical evidence suggests that multinational firms do not have any impact on the output of domestic firms in the first two sub-periods. However, generate positive knowledge spillovers in the last two sub-periods, increasing the output of domestic firms. FDI flows in the pharmaceutical sector increased mainly in the last two sub-periods due to policy changes and more relaxed FDI norms. The study finds that competition effect exists and distinguishes domestic firms. Firms not investing in R&D face enhanced competition from firms investing in R&D activities.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133752792","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Innovation Under Section 2 of the Sherman Act","authors":"R. Gilbert, A. Melamed","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3818303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3818303","url":null,"abstract":"Antitrust cases, including recent complaints filed against dominant technology platforms, have alleged conduct that harms innovation. Section 2 of the Sherman Act is sufficiently broad to address conduct that harms innovation, but courts have little experience adjudicating such allegations. This article briefly reviews the economics literature regarding the effects of market power on innovation incentives. We identify circumstances in which structural conditions warrant a presumption that anticompetitive conduct by a dominant firm is likely to harm or promote innovation and describe various ways in which consideration of likely innovation effects might support finding an antitrust violation or provide a defense of otherwise anticompetitive conduct.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126311337","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cultural Prerequisites for Participating in Open Foresight","authors":"Melanie Wiener, H. Boer","doi":"10.1111/radm.12363","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12363","url":null,"abstract":"Companies are increasingly interested in participating in open foresight. However, little is known about the conditions supporting them to open up successfully in open foresight. This research takes a culture perspective on this issue. The leading assumption is that companies with an open culture are more likely to engage in collaboration than companies with a culture inhibiting openness. We use the Competing Values Framework to measure corporate culture, and collaboration breadth and depth to measure openness to external collaboration. Drawing on a sample of 168 Austrian companies, the research confirms that culture plays an important role in creating an environment supportive of open foresight, albeit in a somewhat surprising way: the internally oriented clan culture appears to support openness, while the externally oriented market culture does not support it. Possible explanations for this finding are put forward as directions for further research. The findings should help companies to predict whether they have the cultural conditions in place to embark on an open foresight journey successfully.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122569344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Navigating the Purchasing Power Gap in New Product Development in Multinational Corporations","authors":"Yang Liu","doi":"10.1111/radm.12384","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12384","url":null,"abstract":"Multinational corporations (MNCs) face a significant purchasing power gap of customers between developed and emerging economies. In R&D intensive industries making physical products, MNCs can benefit from economies of scale. Therefore, managers strive to achieve a product standardization–adaptation (S‐A) balance when navigating the purchasing power gap. Through focusing on five MNCs headquartered in developed countries, I examined how MNCs can achieve such a balance through new product development (NPD). I found that (1) an S‐A balance can be achieved through three NPD strategies (product simplification, product retaining, and reverse innovation); (2) managers need to take into account five key factors when choosing NPD strategies (product complexity, product modularity, brand strategy, position in local competition, and internal technical standards); and (3) the NPD strategies can be implemented through structural separation, temporal separation, and a shared value. This research reveals the complexity of achieving an S‐A balance when managers navigate the purchasing power gap in NPD. Different NPD strategies have certain advantages and shortcomings. High product complexity and product modularity can serve as favorable conditions for a product simplification strategy. A brand strategy of leading‐edge technologies can serve as an adverse condition for a product retaining strategy. Strong local competitors in emerging markets can be a motivation for a reverse innovation strategy, while stringent internal standards for safety can be an adverse condition. This research also reveals the nuances of implementation of NPD strategies in terms of managing innovation and refinement activities. MNCs may need temporal separation when adopting both downhill and uphill NPD strategies.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125105446","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Citizen Participation in Public Administration: Investigating Open Government for Social Innovation","authors":"Lisa Schmidthuber, F. Piller, M. Bogers, D. Hilgers","doi":"10.1111/radm.12365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12365","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, public sector organizations have increasingly focused on citizen contribution by adopting instruments known from open innovation. By collaborating with the periphery and leveraging external knowledge, government institutions initiate social innovation and stimulate a positive change for society. This article examines the involvement of citizens in an ideation platform initiated by a local government and investigates the motivations affecting participation intensity. Drawing on self‐determination theory, we analyze what motivates citizens to participate in an open government platform and how these motivations influence participation quantity. Based on a survey among platform users and the analysis of usage data from the platform operator, we find that motivations of citizen participation in public administration greatly vary across forms of participation. Whereas, intrinsic motivation is positively associated with producing and consuming platform content, external and introjected regulation negatively relate to individuals’ active contribution. At the same time, external regulation is positively associated with evaluation behavior.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133553996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Product Innovation of an Incumbent Firm: A Dynamic Analysis","authors":"Verena Hagspiel, K. Huisman, P. Kort, C. Nunes, Rita Pimentel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3285020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3285020","url":null,"abstract":"In case of a product innovation firms start producing a new product. While doing so, such a firm should decide what to do with its existing product after the firm has innovated. Essentially it can choose between replacing the established product by the new one, or keep on producing the established product so that it produces two products at the same time. The aim of this paper is to design a theoretical framework to analyze this problem. Due to technological progress the quality of the newest available technology, and thus the quality of the innovative product that can be produced by this technology, increases over time. The implication is that a later innovation enables the firm to produce a better innovative product. So, typically the firm faces the tradeoff between innovating fast, which boosts its profits soon but only by a small amount, or innovating later, which leads to a larger payoff increase. The drawback here is that the firm is stuck with producing the established product for a longer time. We fund that a highly uncertain economic environment makes the firm delay abolishing the old product market. But if the innovative market is more volatile, the firm enters the market sooner, provided it will be active on the old market, at least for some time. Moreover, the smaller the initial demand for the innovative product market, the better the quality of the innovative product needs to be for the product innovation to be optimal.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130933190","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Joint Problem Solving and Organizational Learning Capacity in New Product Innovation","authors":"L. Ning, Jian Li","doi":"10.1111/radm.12245","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/radm.12245","url":null,"abstract":"There is a growing need for firms to acquire knowledge externally, but the process has become increasingly complicated. This article studies the mediating roles of the three process dimensions of organizational learning capacity (OLC), namely, knowledge acquisition, transformation, and application capabilities, in the context of a joint problem solving (JPS) arrangement with external collaborators for new product innovation. They employed the structural equation modelling method and analyse a sample of 331 high-tech manufacturers in China. Their results supported a conceptual model that shows (i) JPS exerts a positive impact on knowledge acquisition and transformation capabilities; (ii) these two capabilities promote knowledge application capacity; (iii) knowledge acquisition alone, and the combination of application and transformation capabilities, mediate the effect of JPS on both innovation efficacy and efficiency. Knowledge acquisition and application capabilities also jointly mediate the effect of JPS on innovation efficacy. They added to the existing literature by highlighting the need to consider the mediating roles of different OLC dimensions and the external context of JPS for learning capacity acquisition. Our model provides a practical framework for managers to better understand and influence OLC dimensions to improve innovation when engaging in JPS.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127278780","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Innovation, Openness, and Platform Control","authors":"Geoffrey G. Parker, Marshall W. Van Alstyne","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1079712","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1079712","url":null,"abstract":"Suppose that a firm in charge of a business ecosystem is a firm in charge of a microeconomy. To achieve the highest growth rate, how open should that economy be? To encourage third-party developers, how long should their intellectual property interests last? We develop a sequential innovation model that addresses the trade-offs inherent in these two decisions: i Closing the platform increases the sponsor's ability to charge for access, while opening the platform increases developer ability to build upon it. ii The longer third-party developers retain rights to their innovations, the higher the royalties they and the sponsor earn, but the sooner those developers' rights expire, the sooner their innovations become a public good upon which other developers can build. Our model allows us to characterize the optimal levels of openness and of intellectual property IP duration in a platform ecosystem. We use standard Cobb-Douglas production technologies to derive our results. These findings can inform innovation strategy, choice of organizational form, IP noncompete decisions, and regulation policy. \u0000 \u0000This paper was accepted by Chris Forman, information systems.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121425301","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Long Term Partnership for Achieving Efficient Capacity Allocation","authors":"Fang Liu, T. Lewis, Jing-Sheng Song, Nataliya Kuribko","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2518046","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2518046","url":null,"abstract":"We consider a manufacturer and a group of buyers who partner to share a scarce but expensive-to-build capacity over a finite horizon subject to fluctuating market conditions. The manufacturer must build the capacity before the buyers learn their actual needs. Each member has private history-dependent demand information and makes unverifiable investments. Because the value of the capacity to each partner is highly uncertain, it is challenging for the partnership to achieve supply chain efficiency while sustain under a dynamic environment. By introducing a novel breach remedy, we construct a long term membership agreement that enforces ex-post efficient capacity allocation and ex-ante investments. This agreement is also self-supporting and voluntary, allowing any or all members to dissolve the agreement at any time with provisions for compensation and division of the capacity.","PeriodicalId":367043,"journal":{"name":"Product Innovation eJournal","volume":"86 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-08-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131293648","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}