Search results

Innovation intermediaries have become key actors in open innovation (OI) contexts. Research has improved the understanding of the managerial challenges inherent to intermediation in situations in which problems are rather well defined. Yet, in some OI situations, the relevant actor networks may not be known, there may be no clear common interest, or severe problems may exist with no legitimate common place where they can be discussed. The purpose of this paper is to contribute to the research on innovation intermediaries by showing how intermediaries address managerial challenges related to a high degree of unknown.

The authors draw upon the extant literature to highlight the common core functions of different types of intermediaries. The authors then introduce the “degree of unknown” as a new contingency variable for the analysis of the role of intermediaries for each of these core functions. The authors illustrate the importance of this new variable with four empirical case studies in different industries and countries in which intermediaries are experiencing situations of high level of unknown.

The authors highlight the specific managerial principles that the four intermediaries applied in creating an environment for collective innovation.

Thereby, the authors clarify what intermediation in the unknown may entail.

Volume 19 of Research in Organizational Change and Development includes chapters by an international diverse set of authors including Michael Beer, Victor J. Friedman, Luis Felipe Gómez and Dawna I. Ballard, Ethan S. Bernstein and Frank J. Barrett, Karen J. Jansen and David A. Hofmann, Guido Maes and Geert Van Hootegem, Tobias Fredberg, Flemming Norrgren and Abraham B. (Rami) Shani, and William A. Pasmore. The ideas expressed by these authors are as diverse as their backgrounds.

The literature on organizational change has long acknowledged the need to balance stability and economic efficiency with the need to be flexible and to change. Authors, certainly in the dynamic capabilities tradition but also in other perspectives, have stressed the importance of more open and loosely coupled systems to promote adaption. However, many organizations do not operate on such premises but rather rely on creating efficient business units through tight coupling, building strict social and administrative control, and jointly relying on common systems. In this study, we conduct 46 interviews with employees from three different retail organizations to investigate how units in such tightly coupled systems change within the framework of the set standards. Through contrasting the characteristics of high and low functioning units, we identify three mechanisms that seem to enable the units to successfully and repeatedly realign and establish new configurations. We conclude that the orchestrator of all three realignment mechanisms is the middle manager, and we discuss the middle manager's role and the different activities that enable a successful realignment.

A reason why industry incumbents seldom survive technology transitions is their strong reliance on an efficient, but inflexible organizational system. We studied three digital transformation initiatives that created fast progress in a struggling newspaper group by working against the industry logic and established thinking in the area. This chapter argues that management succeeded in introducing a new strategic practice through these transformation initiatives. We focus on three factors contributing to the success: complexity management, short time development of a long-term vision, and the introduction of impossible goals.

The literature on innovation/change predicts that entrepreneurial initiatives will be killed by the established organizational system. The general answer is to put innovations in separate units. This is not possible for corporate entrepreneurship initiatives, however. In this action research study, we focus on corporate entrepreneurship initiatives’ strategies for survival. We collected data by following 11 corporate entrepreneurship initiatives as they were pursued. We summarize their effort in three transformation mechanisms: aligning with purpose, creating trust, and creating attachment with autonomy. The data indicate that these factors not only contributed to the success of the initiatives but also to renewing the organizational system.

The purpose of this paper is to review the emerging research field of open innovation and identify where the field is going as well as suggest future fields of research.

All academic papers and books published until November 2007 under the label of open innovation were systematically reviewed. Also, nine key researchers were asked to contribute with their opinions on the research frontier.

A number of key themes in the research were identified, and conclusions on the underlying structure were drawn. This reveals that there is a tendency towards a broader definition and application of the term, a growing critical perspective, and a concentration on theory development and managerial implications.

The paper suggests that the locus of the innovation process and the extent of collaboration should be used as two dimensions in a model to further understanding of how open innovation develops. These dimensions have an important impact on both the human and the organizational side of innovation, areas that are highlighted as important fields for further research.

Despite the interest in the open innovation topic, a comprehensive review of the academic publications in the area does not seem to exist. The review and the conclusions drawn support the understanding of the growing field.

Increasing market pressures require organizations to rethink the development of change capability. Building a sustainable and flexible organization capable of responding in a timely manner to quickly changing customer demands without compromising technological excellence and quality is a complex task. This chapter builds on a five-year study of transformation efforts at a product development unit of Ericsson. The complexity of designing and managing learning mechanisms as both a transformation engine and a way to improve new product development is captured. The chapter points toward the challenges of designing and managing learning mechanisms that enhance organizational agility.

Dawna I. Ballard (PhD, University of California, Santa Barbara, 2002) is associate professor in the Department of Communication Studies at the University of Texas at Austin. Her research examines organizational temporality, with particular attention to ways in which time shapes and is shaped by a range of communication processes. Her published research appears in outlets such as Communication Research, Communication Monographs, Small Group Research, Management Communication Quarterly, as well as several interdisciplinary edited volumes, including Time and Memory, Workplace Temporalities, and Time in Organizational Research.