Search results

The purpose of this study is to investigate how the emotion expressed by a fictitious proposer influences the responder’s decision to accept or reject a severely unfair deal, represented by the splitting of a predetermined sum of money between the two players during an ultimatum game (UG). Rejection leads both parts to dissipate that sum. Critically the authors consider the situation in which both players have the best alternative to negotiation agreement (BATNA), which simulates a backup plan to rely on in case of no agreement.

The participants played a UG and, to foster the ecological validity of the paradigm, the parts could both rely on a more or less generous BATNA. The critical manipulation was the emotion expressed by the proposer while their BATNA was either hidden (Exp. 1) or communicated (Exp. 2).

The proposer’s emotions influenced participants’ own emotions, affected their social evaluations about the proposer, the desire for future interactions with the proposer and were used to infer the proposer’s BATNA when it was unknown. In this latter case, proposers’ emotions and in particular his/her happiness, decreased dramatically the participants’ tendency to reject even severely unfair offers.

Past research on UG has been predominantly aimed to investigate the effect of responders’ emotions or the effects of responders’ emotions on the proposer, devoting little attention to how the critical responder’s acceptance/rejection decision might be affected by the proposer’s emotion. Especially in the ecological situation where the parts have a BATNA in case of non-agreement.

This study aims to investigate how two collaborative methods – selection and synthesis – influence knowledge convergence when people articulate a new strategic direction driving transformation within the organization.

The study is based on a longitudinal field experiment developed in four organizations involving 82 employees over a three-month process. Inspired by dynamics governing flocks as complex adaptive systems, selection and synthesis have been separately used in two sets of companies. Primary and secondary data have been largely collected and analyzed throughout the whole process.

This study describes how the two alternative methods differently influenced two kinds of knowledge convergence. While selection triggers a general and static knowledge convergence and the propagation of individual knowledge over time, synthesis fosters a local and dynamic knowledge convergence where individuals tend to propagate knowledge generated collectively.

This research offers insights into understanding the influence of alternative collaborative methods on the creation and propagation of knowledge when people are converging toward a new strategic direction. From a theoretical perspective, it contributes to complex adaptive system theory, highlighting the role of knowledge convergence and emergence through collaboration.

This research offers insights to managers who deal with the complexity of the engagement of different stakeholders during collaborative processes, offering some actionable takeaways to foster knowledge convergence by alternatively employing selection and synthesis.

This paper contributes to the management and social information processing literature emphasizing the role of knowledge convergence emerging from the complex interactions among multiple stakeholders.

The purpose of this paper is to assess how technology transfer offices (TTOs) of a public university of the state of São Paulo use patent valuation methods in the process of using developed technology value and transferring technology to industry.

This study is an exploratory qualitative investigation based on a case study conducted in a public university in the state of São Paulo. The university has a TTO and an internal structure for technology transfer. In-depth interviews were conducted with the TTO manager about patent valuation and the answers given were analysed.

The results on how TTOs use patent valuation methods in the process of assigning value to technology indicate which factors facilitate and which factors hinder the valuation of patents in technologies developed at universities.

The possible lack of data disclosure due to confidentiality regarding royalties and trading fees makes further comparisons between Brazilian public universities difficult. Therefore, this study recommends that further studies on patent valuation and technology transfer process at private universities, research institutes and public and private companies should be performed.

In the practice, this study contributes to companies and TTOs by increasing their synergies in licensing negotiations, as well as by reducing the gap of information, between the business parties for assignment and transfer of technologies. With regard to theoretical contribution, this study can cite advances in the methods to measure the financial benefits arising from the valuation of technologies embedded in the patents.

Owing to the lack of research on the methods of valuation used by TTOs of Brazilian universities, the present study can be useful in serving as a theoretical source for future research and in supporting future TTO negotiations in the process of transferring technologies to productive industry.

This paper aims to research how technology transfer occurs, based on the Schumpeterian approach to innovation trilogy focusing on the interaction between the university and the company.

The methodology used for this study was the analysis of two cases with an exploratory and qualitative approach. The case study subjects were two Brazilian universities: University of Campinas (UNICAMP) and University of Vale do Rio dos Sinos (UNISINOS). Semi-structured interviews were used as the data collection technique, whereas content analysis was used as the analysis technique.

The main results showed the need of companies and universities to understand that working in collaborative technology research contributes to the transformation of applied research into technological innovations that can transform society.

The research’s limitations were the unfeasibility of studying the government helix, the lack of clear and established processes within universities so that a comparison between the cases would be possible and the lack of access to technology contracts, as they are considered confidential. In addition, the use of two cases is considered a limitation, as it is not possible to generalize the conclusions pointed out by the study.

With this research, the authors were able to conclude that the university–industry interaction process has been improving, but it still needs to advance in organizational aspects. Some of the aspects to be considered are the adjustments for the institutions’ internal policies, the existing negotiations, the researchers’ behavior regarding the dissemination of the innovation culture and the performance of the technological innovation centers, which gradually are being trained to work in the market as well as in the university. It is necessary that primarily companies and universities understand that they must join efforts in collaborative technological research, so that the financial resources invested are not only accepted as published articles in qualified journals but also turn into technological innovations accepted by the market. All this investment must return as new products, services and technologies that generate local, regional, national and even international impact, implementing new types of businesses and new markets and yielding an economic impact in the country, thus generating innovation and social well-being.

This paper aims to study how multinational enterprises (MNEs) can best integrate legitimacy concerns into their new product-launching strategy to successfully introduce high-value hi-tech innovations in emerging countries.

Theoretical constructs on the role and process of legitimacy construction for the introduction of a new product are built upon the existing literature. Then they are validated and refined through the formulation and analysis of case studies of the launch of genetically modified cotton seeds by Monsanto in India and a HIV/AIDS drug cocktail by Merck in Brazil.

Legitimacy construction can serve MNEs to face challenges successfully while launching high-value hi-tech products in emerging countries. Challenges to MNEs are likely to be founded on a combination of four types of uncertainties: technological, commercial, organizational and societal. Expected challengers are public agencies and actors representing civil society. An MNE can prepare itself through legitimacy construction along three dimensions: redesign of technology, revision of marketing strategy and non-market investments. To implement the aforesaid, MNEs can engage in outreach in the form of strategic patience, market transaction, business collaboration, compromise and/or confrontation with diverse carefully chosen stakeholders.

The authors limited ourselves to tracing only the formal interactions of MNEs, while it is well-known that many informal and backdoor activities can also accompany their growth in emerging economies.

Legitimacy construction can help MNEs face challenges successfully while launching high-value hi-tech products in emerging countries. This calls for an evaluation of the systemic uncertainties followed by the formulation of a strategy for legitimacy construction and implementation through outreach to diverse systemic actors. Strategic patience can yield positive returns. Market transactions can serve as economic anchors. Collaboration can be pursued with parties who can share the costs of legitimization construction and/or reduce technological and marketing uncertainties. Confrontation should be the last choice. Compromise is the most probable but not the only outreach strategy possible after a confrontation.

Legitimacy implies product acceptance not only from the targeted consumer but also other societal stakeholders concerned with the safety and equity of the consumption in the emerging country, especially when regulations are not well-defined and/or implemented. The two kinds of societal stakeholders which are likely to monitor MNEs are public agencies and civil society groups. Public agencies will be concerned about the quantity, quality, technology or price of the innovation to be introduced. Civil society and NGOs may help the MNE act as citizen watchdogs for the environment and vulnerable communities.

Theoretical constructs have been developed in this paper on the sources of challenges in new product introduction, the types of challengers and the components of the firm’s legitimacy construction strategy and its implementation through an outreach strategy.

This study investigates the role of collaborative spaces as organizational support for internal innovation through cross-functional teams and for open innovation with external stakeholders. In particular, the study focuses on collaborative spaces as tools for multiplex (i.e., simultaneous internal and external boundary management in innovation projects).

The authors conducted a qualitative study in a multi-divisional organization that set up in its headquarters a collaborative space for collaborative product development. Data were collected through semi-structured interviews and participant observations.

Findings highlight that the relation between expectations and experiences about the collaborative space impact on employees' ability to perform boundary work inside and outside the organization. In addition to the collaborative space's affording role for expectations about hands-on collaborative innovation (space as laboratory), the study also highlights a set of collaboration constraints. These latter are generated by perceived boundary configurations (i.e. degree of boundary permeability and infrastructure in internal and external collaborations) and by discrepancies between expectations (space as laboratory) and actual collaboration experiences in the space (i.e. space as maze, cloister, showcase and silo). We show that space-generated constraints slow down internal and external boundary work for innovation and generate a trade-off between them.

Using the process-based perspective of boundary work, the paper connects studies on cross-functional teaming and open innovation through the concept of “multiplex boundary work.” It also contributes to the literature on boundary work by showing the challenges of using collaborative spaces as organizational support tools for multiplex boundary spanning.

The French higher education system has experienced reforms since the 2000s that gradually emphasized the executive power of universities and the centralization of decision-making. This culminated with the excellence initiatives (Idex) that concentrated 7.7 billion euros on only nine institutions to create “world-class” universities and made their leaders responsible for the local allocation of this substantial endowment. The universities’ executives had four years to complete changes in governance in order to see their institution permanently awarded the title and the funding of Idex. The hiring process is one of the elements that this policy impacted the most within these universities, enabling leaders to create new kinds of positions and control the hiring process. However, by looking at the hiring practices within three different Idex, we will show that collegiality did not disappear but rather it evolved: in the three cases, the closest colleagues have been marginalized but decision-making remained collective and in the hands of academics chosen by the university executives. Variations in the intensity of this evolution could be observed according to two dimensions. First, the scientific reputation of the university: the higher it is, the less collegiality is transformed. Second, the level of external pressures: the less collegial universities have relaxed their hiring practices after the evaluation that permanently granted them the label of Idex.

The purpose of this paper is to identify knowledge gaps on insinuations of possible directions of European Union (EU) and international climate policies.

This study has used participatory approach of highly experienced stakeholders’ engagement, involved directly or indirectly in the process of policymaking. A range of priority issues has been initially identified through desk analysis and key stakeholders have been selected and invited to partake in the process. Preliminary results have been validated through interaction with stakeholders during a series of workshops.

The results show the identification of a series of sectors, where climate policy is expected to focus in the future and the definition of 11 specific topics upon which knowledge gaps are expected to appear. Results on the identified knowledge needs are analysed and categorized by each prioritized main topic and compared with literature findings. Emphasis is identified to be placed on the topics of renewable energy, EU climate policy and international climate negotiations, which are the most popular ones, followed by energy policy and energy efficiency.

A key element of the approach is the consideration of key experts’ feedback on their specific area of expertise, instead of general public engagement, therefore leading to accurate results. Despite the fact that our approach was applied to a specific problem, the overall analysis could provide a framework for supporting applications in various problems in the field of priorities’ identification and even expanding to decision-making problems.

Building on work that explores the relationship between individual beliefs and ability to recognize discrimination (e.g., Kaiser and Major, 2006), we examine how an adherence to beliefs about gender essentialism, gender egalitarianism, and meritocracy shape one’s interpretation of an illegal act of sexual harassment involving a male supervisor and female subordinate. We also consider whether the role of the gendered culture of engineering (Faulkner, 2009) matters for this relationship. Specifically, we conducted an online survey-experiment asking individuals to report their beliefs about gender and meritocracy and subsequently to evaluate a fictitious but illegal act of sexual harassment in one of two university research settings: an engineering department, a male-dominated setting whose culture is documented as being unwelcoming to women (Hatmaker, 2013; Seron, Silbey, Cech, and Rubineau, 2018), and an ambiguous research setting. We find evidence that the stronger one’s adherence to gender egalitarian beliefs, the greater one’s ability to detect inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment while gender essentialist beliefs play no role in their detection. The stronger one’s adherence to merit beliefs, the less likely they are to view an illegal interaction as either inappropriate or as sexual harassment. We account for respondent knowledge of sexual harassment and their socio-demographic characteristics, finding that the former is more often associated with the detection of inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment at work. We close with a discussion of the transferability of results and policy implications of our findings.

Academics and practitioners have long acknowledged the potential of multiagent systems (MAS) to automate and autonomize decision-making in logistics and supply chain networks. Despite the manifold promises of MAS, industry adoption is lagging behind, and the exact benefits of these systems remain unclear. This study aims to fill this knowledge gap by analyzing 11 specific MAS use cases, highlighting their benefits, clarifying how they can help enhance logistics network resilience and identifying existing barriers.

A three-stage Delphi study was conducted with 18 industry experts. In the first round, these experts identified 11 use cases of MAS and their potential benefits, as well as any barriers that could hinder their adoption. In the second round, they assessed the identified use cases with regard to their potential to enhance logistics network resilience and improve organizational productivity. Furthermore, they estimated the complexity of MAS implementation. In the third round, the experts reassessed their evaluations in light of the evaluations of the other study participants.

This study proposes 11 specific MAS use cases and illustrates their potential for increasing logistics network resilience and enhancing organizational performance due to autonomous decision-making in informational processes. Furthermore, this study discusses important barriers for MAS, such as lack of standardization, insufficient technological maturity, soaring costs, complex change management and a lack of existing use cases. From a theoretical perspective, it is shown how MAS can contribute to resilience research in supply chain management.

The identification and assessment of diverse MAS use cases informs managers about the potential of this technology and the barriers that need to be overcome.

This study fills a gap in the literature by providing a thorough and up-to-date assessment of the potential of MAS for logistics and supply chain management. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the relevance of MAS for logistics network resilience using the Delphi method.