| A Contingent Model of New Product Strategy under Degrees of Market Competitiveness |
| | Jayaram, Jayanth | U. of Oregon | jayaram@oregon.uoregon.edu | (541)-346-3407 |
| | Calantone, Roger J. | Michigan State U. | calantone@pilot.msu.edu | (517)-353-6381 |
| | Cooper, Robert G. | McMaster U. | NA | NA |
| | Kleinschmidt, Elko J. | McMaster U. | NA | NA |
| | Recent research has reported mixed findings on the influence of market competitiveness on antecedents to new product development (NPD) project performance. Some studies have reported that market competitiveness operates as an exogenous influence, others have reported moderating influences and still others even non-significant influences. In this study, we test two alternative models by blending perspectives from the industrial organizational based “external” view and the resource-based internal view of the firm. First, market competitiveness is hypothesized to have an exogenous influence on a series of linkages that ultimately affects NPD project performance. Next, market competitiveness is hypothesized to have a moderating or contingency influence. Our results support the contingency model and indicate that resource compatibility or fit is a key construct in the environment-competitive advantage-performance relationships at the NPD project level. Specifically, the results suggest that for firms perceiving a high level of market competitiveness, resource fit influences project performance primarily through product advantages. On the other hand, for firms perceiving a low level of market competitiveness, resource fit influences project performance through non-product advantages. |
| | Keywords: Organization Theory; New Product Development; Contingency |
| Resource Context and the Returns to Investments in R&D |
| | McEvily, Susan K. | U. of Pittsburgh | smcevily@katz.business.pitt.edu | (412)-648-1707 |
| | Chakravarthy, Bala | U. of Minnesota | [bchakravarthy@csom.umn.edu] | [(612)-625-0882] |
| | Although recent studies attribute differences in the profitability of R&D to a firm's technology context, research has not yet identified which characteristics of context matter. We examine how the complexity, generality, and tacitness of a firm's technology context, defined by industry resources, affect the rate of return to investment in R&D. |
| | Keywords: research and development; technology; industry resources |
| Technological Evolution as a Complex Adaptive System |
| | Fleming, Lee | Harvard Business School | lfleming@hbs.edu | 617 495 6613 |
| | Sorenson, Olav | U. of Chicago | olav.sorenson@gsb.uchicago.edu | (773)-834-1809 |
| | This paper develops a theory of invention by drawing on complex adaptive systems theory. We see invention as a process of recombinant
search over technology landscapes. This framing suggests that recent work in evolutionary theory (e.g., Kauffman 1992) could provide useful
insight into the study of invention. For example, Kauffman's work suggests that inventors might face a "complexity catastrophe" when they
attempt to combine large numbers of interdependent technologies. Our empirical results show support for this expectation. Nevertheless,
the results also suggest that the process of invention differs in important ways from biological evolution. We discuss the implications of these
findings for research on technological evolution, industrial change, and technology strategy. |
| | Keywords: complexity; invention; technological change |
| Fast Cycle Capability: A Conceptual Integration |
| | George, Ebi | U. of Kansas | egeorge@bschool.wpo.ukans.edu | (785)-864-7521 |
| | Narayanan, V. K. | U. of Kansas | vnarayanan@bschool.wpo.ukans.edu | (785)-864-7561 |
| | Organizational speed is of prime importance in today's business environment, where globalization has
meant increasingly intense competition and shorter product life cycles. However, academic research
related to organizational speed, which includes literature on new product development, advanced
manufacturing technologies and strategic decision making, has been fragmented and has focused on
specific elements of the firm's value chain. We integrate this extant research, extend Bower and Hout's
(1988) concept of fast cycle capability as permeating the entire organization, and identify its key
elements to be strategic decision making, new product development and the primary value chain
activities. We also develop a model of the concept which relates it to environmental, organizational and
technology-related factors. We posit two sets of hypotheses. First, the competitive advantage gained
from fast cycle capability depends on specific characteristics of a firm's industry environment. Second,
organizational (strategic focus, top management team characteristics, organizational structure and
project management) and technology-related (the firm's absorptive capacity, network embeddedness
and investments in technology) factors impact the different elements of fast cycle capability. While
managers of a firm have little control over the characteristics of the environment(s) in which the firm
operates, they have more influence over the organizational and technology-related factors that can be
used to enable fast cycle capability.
|
| | Keywords: fast cycle capability; organizational speed; time-based management |