Using a multiple-case, inductive study of eight technology collaborations between ten
organizations in the global computing and communications industries between 2001 and 2006
this paper examines why some interorganizational relationships produce technological
innovations while others do not. Comparisons of more and less innovative collaborations
show that high-performing collaborative innovation involves more than possessing the
appropriate structural antecedents (e.g., R&D capabilities, social embeddedness)
suggested by prior alliance studies. Rather, it also involves dynamic organizational
processes associated with collaboration partners’ leadership roles that solve critical
innovation problems related to recombination across boundaries. While dominating and
consensus leadership processes are associated with less innovation, a rotating leadership
process is associated with more innovation. It involves alternating decision control that
accesses the complementary capabilities of both partner organizations, zig-zagging
objectives that engender deep and broad technological search for potential innovations,
and fluctuating network cascades that mobilize different participants who bring variable
inputs to recombination. The paper also discusses recombination mechanisms in the
organization of collaborative innovation, variations in the performance of dynamic
interorganizational ties, and how organizations develop symbiotic relationships that
overcome the tendency of long-lived relationships toward inertia.
AdnerR.KapoorR.2009 “Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the
structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology
generations.” Strategic Management Journal,
31: 306-333.
2.
AhujaG.2000 “Collaboration networks, structural holes, and
innovation: A longitudinal study.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 45:
425-455.
3.
AhujaG.KatilaR.2001 “Technological acquisitions and the innovation
performance of acquiring firms: A longitudinal study.” Strategic
Management Journal, 22:
197-220.
4.
AhujaG.KatilaR.2004 “Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncratic
situations.” Strategic Management Journal,
25: 887-907.
5.
AllenT. J.1977Managing the Flow of Technology. Cambridge,
MA: MIT Press.
6.
AnandB. N.KhannaT.2000 “Do firms learn to create value? The case of
alliances.” Strategic Management Journal,
21: 295-315.
7.
ArinoA.de la TorreJ.1998 “Learning from failure: Towards an evolutionary model of
collaborative ventures.” Organization Science,
9: 306-325.
8.
BakerG.GibbonsR.MurphyK.2002 “Relational contracts and the theory of the
firm.” Quarterly Journal of Economics,
117: 39-83.
9.
BechkyB. A.2006 “Gaffers, gofers, and grips: Role-based coordination in
tempoary organizations.” Organization Science,
17: 3-21.
10.
BeckmanC. M.2006 “The influence of founding team company affiliations on
firm behavior.” Academy of Management Journal,
49: 741-758.
11.
BeckmanC. M.HaunschildP. R.2002 “Network learning: The effects of partners’ heterogeneity
of experience on corporate acquisitions.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 47:
92-124.
12.
BresnahanT.GreensteinS.1999 “Technological competition and the structure of the
computer industry.” Journal of Industrial Economics,
47: 1-40.
13.
BrownS. L.EisenhardtK. M.1997 “The art of continuous change: Linking complexity theory
and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations.”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 42:
1-34.
14.
BurgelmanR. A.2002 “Strategy as vector and the inertia of coevolutionary
lock-in.” Administrative Science Quarterly,
47: 325-357.
15.
BurtR.2004 “Structural holes and good ideas.”
American Journal of Sociology, 110:
349-399.
16.
Casadesus-MasanellR.YoffieD. B.2007 “Wintel: Cooperation and conflict.”
Management Science, 53:
584-598.
17.
CasciaroT.1998 “Seeing things clearly: Social structure, personality,
and accuracy in social network perception.” Social
Networks, 20:
331-351.
18.
CasciaroT.PiskorskiM.2005 “Power imbalance, mutual dependence, and constraint
absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory.”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 50:
167-199.
19.
ChesbroughH.2003Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from
Technology. Boston: Harvard
Business School Press.
20.
ClarkK.FujimotoT.1991Product Development Performance. Boston:
Harvard Business School Press.
21.
CohenM. D.LevinthalD.1989 “Innovation and learning: The two faces of
R&D.” Economic Journal, 99:
569-596.
22.
ComanorW. S.SchererF. M.1969 “Patent statistics as a source of technical
change.” Journal of Political Economy,
77: 392-398.
23.
DavisJ. P.EisenhardtK. M.BinghamC. B.2007 “Developing theory through simulation
methods.” Academy of Management Review,
32: 480-499.
24.
DavisJ. P.EisenhardtK. M.BinghamC. B.2009 “Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of
simple rules.” Administrative Science Quarterly,
54: 413-452.
25.
DavisJ. P.2011 “Network agency problems.” MIT
Sloan School of ManagementWorking Paper.
26.
DosiG.1982 “Technological paradigms and technological
trajectories.” Research Policy, 11:
147-162.
27.
DoughertyD.1990 “Understanding new markets for new
products.” Strategic Management Journal,
11: 59-78.
28.
DoughertyD.1992 “Interpretive barriers to successful product innovation
in large firms.” Organization Science,
3: 179-202.
29.
DozY. L.1988 “Technology partnerships between larger and smaller
firms: Some critical issues.” International Studies of
Management and Organization, 17:
31-57.
30.
DozY. L.1996 “The evolution of cooperation in strategic alliances:
Initial conditions or learning processes.” Strategic Management
Journal, 17:
55-83.
31.
EdmondsonA. C.BohmerR. M.2001 “Disrupted routines: Team learning and new technology
implementation in hospitals.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 46:
685-716.
32.
EisenhardtK. M.1989 “Building theories from case study
research.” Academy of Management Review,
14: 532-550.
33.
EisenhardtK. M.GraebnerM.2007 “Theory building from cases: Opportunities and
challenges.” Academy of Management Journal,
50: 25-32.
34.
FlemingL.2001 “Recombinant uncertainty in technological
search.” Management Science, 47:
177-132.
35.
FlemingL.WaguespackD. M.2006 “Brokerage, boundary spanning, and leadership in open
innovation communities.” Organization Science,
18: 165-180.
36.
GalunicD. C.RodanS.1998 “Resource recombinations in the firm: Knowledge
structures and the potential for Schumpeterian innovation.”
Strategic Management Journal, 19:
1193-1201.
37.
GansJ. S.HsuD.SternS.2001 “When does start-up innovation spur the gale of creative
destruction?” RAND Journal of Economics,
33: 571-586.
38.
GoldenB. R.1992 “The past is the past—Or is it? The use of retrospective
accounts as indicators of past strategy.” Academy of Management
Journal, 35:
848-860.
39.
GrantR. M.1996a “Prospering in dynamically-competitive environments:
Organizational capability as knowledge integration.”
Organization Science, 7:
375-387.
40.
GrantR. M.1996b “Toward a knowledge-based theory of the
firm.” Strategic Management Journal,
17 (Winter Special Issue):
109-122.
41.
GreveH. R.TaylorA.2000 “Innovations as catalysts for organizational change:
Shifts in organizational cognition and search.” Administrative
Science Quarterly, 45:
54-80.
42.
GrilichesZ.1990 “Patent statistics as economic indicators: A
survey.” Journal of Economic Literature,
28: 1661-1707.
43.
GrossmanS. J.HartO. D.1986 “The cost and benefits of ownership: A theory of vertical
and lateral integration.” Journal of Political Economy,
94: 691-719.
44.
GulatiR.1995a “Familiarity breeds trust? The implications of repeated
ties on contractual choice in alliances.” Academy of Management
Journal, 38:
85-112.
45.
GulatiR.1995b “Social structure and alliance formation patterns: A
longitudinal analysis.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 40:
619-652.
46.
GulatiR.SytchM.2007 “Dependence asymmetry and joint dependence in
interorganizational relationships: Effects of embeddedness on a manufacturer’s
performance in procurement relationships.” Administrative
Science Quarterly, 52:
32-69.
47.
HagedoornJ.1993 “Understanding the rationale of strategic technology
partnering: Interorganizational modes of cooperation and sectoral
differences.” Strategic Management Journal,
14: 371-385.
48.
HamelG.1991 “Competition for competence and inter-partner learning
within international strategic alliances.” Strategic Management
Journal, 12 (Summer Special Issue):
83-103.
49.
HansenM. T.1999 “The search-transfer problem: The role of weak ties in
sharing knowledge across organization subunits.” Administrative
Science Quarterly, 44:
82-111.
50.
HargadonA.SuttonR. I.1997 “Technology brokering and innovation in a product
development firm.” Administrative Science Quarterly,
42: 716-749.
HendersonR.1995 “Of life cycles real and imaginary: The unexpectedly long
old age of optical lithography.” Research Policy,
24: 631-643.
53.
HendersonR. M.ClarkK. B.1990 “Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of
existing product technologies and the failure of established firms.”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 35:
9-30.
54.
HumanS.ProvanK.2000 “Legitimacy building in the evolution of small-firm
multilateral networks: A comparative study of success and failure.”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 45:
327-365.
55.
IbarraH.1993 “Network centrality, power, and innovation involvement:
Determinants of technical and administrative roles.” Academy of
Management Journal, 36:
471-501.
56.
JacobidesM. G.2006 “Benefiting from innovation: Value creation, value
appropriation and the role of industry architectures.” Research
Policy, 35:
1200-1221.
57.
KaleP.DyerJ. H.SinghH.2002 “Alliance capability, stock market response, and
long-term alliance success: The role of the alliance function.”
Strategic Management Journal, 23:
747-767.
58.
KatilaR.2002 “New product search over time: Past ideas in their
prime?” Academy of Management Journal,
45: 995-1010.
59.
KatilaR.AhujaG.2002 “Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of
search behavior and new product introduction.” Academy of
Management Journal, 45:
1183-1194.
60.
KatilaR.RosenbergerJ.EisenhardtK. M.2008 “Swimming with sharks: Technology ventures, defense
mechanisms, and corporate relationships.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 53:
295-332.
61.
KhannaT.GulatiR.NohriaN.1998 “The dynamics of learning alliances: Competition,
cooperation, and relative scope.” Strategic Management
Journal, 19:
193-210.
62.
KleinK. J.ZiegertJ. C.KnightA. P.XiaoY.2006 “Dynamic delegation: Shared, hierarchhical, and
deindividualized leadership in extreme action teams.”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 51:
590-621.
63.
KogutB.ZanderU.1992 “Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the
replication of technology.” Organization Science,
3: 383-397.
64.
KrackhardtD.1990 “Asessing the political landscape: Structure, cognition,
and power in organizations.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 35:
342-369.
LarsonA.1992 “Network dyads in entrepreneurial settings: A study of
the governance of exchange relationships.” Administrative
Science Quarterly, 37:
76-104.
67.
Leonard-BartonD.1990 “A dual methodology for case studies: Synergistic use of
a longitudinal single site with replicated multiple sites.”
Organization Science, 1:
248-266.
68.
LevinR. C.KlevorickA. K.NelsonR. R.WinterS. G.1987 “Appropriating the returns from industrial research and
development: Comments and discussion.” Brookings Papers on
Economic Activity, 3:
783-831.
69.
MaurerI.EbersM.2006 “Dynamics of social capital and their performance
implications: Lessons from biotechnology start-ups.”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 51:
262-292.
70.
MayerK. J.ArgyresN.2004 “Learning to contract: Evidence from the personal
computer industry.” Organization Science,
15: 394-410.
71.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.1994Qualitative Data Analysis, 2d ed.Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
72.
MillerC. C.CardinalL. B.GlickW. B.1997 “Retrospective reports in organizational research: A
reexamination of recent evidence.” Academy of Management
Journal, 40:
189-204.
73.
MorsM. L.2009 “Innovation in a global consulting firm: When the problem
is too much diversity.” Strategic Management Journal,
31: 841-872.
74.
MoweryD. C.OxleyJ. E.SilvermanB. R.1998 “Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation:
Implications for the resource-based view of the firm.” Research
Policy, 27:
507-523.
75.
MoweryD. C.RosenbergN.1998Paths of Innovation. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
76.
NarinF.NormaE.PerryR.1988 “Patents as indicators of corporate technological
strength.” Research Policy, 18:
139-154.
77.
NelsonR. R.WinterS. G.1982An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Cambridge,
MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University
Press.
78.
O’MahonyS.FerraroF.2007 “The emergence of governance in an open source
community.” Academy of Management Journal,
50: 1079-1106.
79.
ObstfeldD.2005 “Social networks, the tertius iungens
orientation, and involvement in innovation.” Administrative
Science Quarterly, 50:
100-130.
80.
ObstfeldD.2011 “Creative projects: A less-routine approach towards
getting new things done.” Organization Science
(in press).
81.
Owen-SmithJ.PowellW. W.2003 “Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects
of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community.”
Organization Science, 15:
5-21.
82.
OzcanC. P.EisenhardtK. M.2008 “Origin of alliance portfolios: Entrepreneurs, network
strategies, and firm performance.” Academy of Management
Journal, 52:
246-279.
83.
PodolnyJ. M.StuartT. E.1995 “A role-based ecology of technological
change.” American Journal of Sociology,
100: 1224-1260.
84.
PowellW. W.KoputK. W.Smith-DoerrL.1996 “Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of
innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology.”
Administrative Science Quarterly, 41:
116-145.
85.
ReagansR.ZuckermanE. W.2001 “Networks, diversity, and productivity: The social
capital of corporate R&D teams.” Organization
Science, 12:
502-517.
86.
RodanS.GalunicD. C.2004 “More than network structure: How knowledge heterogeneity
influences managerial performance and innovativeness.” Strategic
Management Journal, 25:
541-562.
87.
RosenkopfL.NerkarA.2001 “Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration and
impact in the optical disc industry.” Strategic Management
Journal, 22:
287-306.
StuartT. E.1998 “Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An
investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology
industry.” Administrative Science Quarterly,
43: 668-698.
90.
StuartT. E.2000 “Interorganizational alliances and the performance of
firms: A study of growth and innovation rates in a high-technology
industry.” Strategic Management Journal,
21: 791-811.
91.
TeeceD.1986 “Profiting from technological innovation. Implications
for integration, collaboration, licensing, and public policy.”
Research Policy, 15:
285-305.
92.
TrajtenbergM.1990Economic Analysis of Product Innovation: The Case of CT Scanners.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
93.
TripsasM.1997 “Surviving radical technological change through dynamic
capability: Evidence form the typesetter industry.” Industrial
and Corporate Change, 6:
341-377.
94.
TushmanM.1977 “Special boundary roles in the innovation
process.” Administrative Science Quarterly,
22: 587-605.
95.
UzziB.1996 “The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the
economic performance of organizations: The network effect.”
American Sociological Review, 61:
674-698.
96.
UzziB.1997 “Social structure and competition in interfirm networks:
The paradox of embeddedness.” Administrative Science
Quarterly, 42:
36-67.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
