Launching breakthrough and incremental new products is vital to firm performance; it also resonates with both ego (i.e., directly connected partners) and global (i.e., interconnected ties in an industry) network perspectives. Prior research has listed several ego network– and global network–level factors that affect innovations, but this study goes a step further, to reveal the interactions of these factors as critical product launch mechanisms. An analysis of alliance networks in the consumer packaged goods industry from 1990 to 2010 shows that a central position in a global network represents a double-edged sword: it improves a firm's incremental new product launches but harms its breakthrough new product launches. Furthermore, a firm's ego network (manifested as density and diversity) and R&D capability enable it to leverage its global network position by enhancing the benefits for incremental new products and mitigating its hazards for breakthrough new products. This study's findings thus offer new insights into the role of ego and global networks in facilitating or hindering new product launches.
AhujaGautam (2000), “Collaboration Networks, Structural Holes, and Innovation: A Longitudinal Study,”Administrative Science Quarterly, 45 (September), 425–55.
2.
AhujaGautam and LampertCurba Morris (2001), “Entrepreneurship in the Large Corporation: A Longitudinal Study of How Established Firms Create Breakthrough Inventions,”Strategic Management Journal, 22 (6/7), 521–43.
3.
AhujaManju K., GallettaDennis F., and CarleyKathleen M. (2003), “Individual Centrality and Performance in Virtual R&D Groups: An Empirical Study,”Management Science, 49 (1), 21–38.
4.
ArellanoManuel and BondStephen (1991), “Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations,”Review of Economic Studies, 58 (2), 277–97.
5.
ArellanoManuel and BoverOlympia (1995), “Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Error-Components Models,”Journal of Econometrics, 68 (1), 29–51.
6.
AudiaPino G. and GoncaloJack A. (2007), “Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry,”Management Science, 53 (1), 1–15.
7.
BaltagiBadi (2008), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
8.
BaumJoel A.C., CalabreseTony, and SilvermanBrian S. (2000), “Don't Go It Alone: Alliance Network Composition and Startups’ Performance in Canadian Biotechnology,”Strategic Management Journal, 21 (3), 267–94.
9.
BlundellRichard and BondStephen (1998), “Initial Conditions and Moment Restrictions in Dynamic Panel Data Models,”Journal of Econometrics, 87 (1), 115–43.
10.
BouldingWilliam and StaelinRichard (1995), “Identifying Generalizable Effects of Strategic Actions on Firm Performance: The Case of Demand-Side Returns to R&D Spending,”Marketing Science, 14 (3), G222–36.
11.
BrassDaniel J., ButterfieldKenneth D., and SkaggsBruce C. (1998), “Relationships and Unethical Behavior: A Social Network Perspective,”Academy of Management Review, 23 (1), 14–31.
12.
Bureau of Economic Analysis (2011), “National Income and Product Accounts Table 2.3.5: Personal Consumption Expenditures by Major Type of Product,” (accessed February 1, 2014), [available in Section 2 under “1969–Present” at http://www.bea.gov//national/nipaweb/DownSS2.asp].
13.
BurtRonald S. (1980), “Autonomy in a Social Topology,”American Journal of Sociology, 85 (4), 892–925.
ChandyRajesh K. and TellisGerard J. (1998), “Organizing for Radical Product Innovation: The Overlooked Role of Willingness to Cannibalize,”Journal of Marketing Research, 35 (November), 474–87.
16.
CohenWesley M. and LevinthalDaniel A. (1990), “Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation,”Administrative Science Quarterly, 35 (1), 128–52.
17.
ColemanJames S. (1990), Foundation of Social Theory. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
18.
CuiAnna Shaojie and O'ConnorGina (2012), “Alliance Portfolio Resource Diversity and Firm Innovation,”Journal of Marketing, 76 (July), 24–43.
19.
DodgsonMark, GannDavid, and SalterAmmon (2006), “The Role of Technology in the Shift Towards Open Innovation: The Case of Procter & Gamble,”R&D Management, 36 (3), 333–46.
20.
DuttaShantanu, NarasimhanOm, and RajivSurendra (1999), “Success in High-Technology Markets: Is Marketing Capability Critical?”Marketing Science, 18 (4), 547–68.
21.
EndersWalter (1995), Applied Econometric Time Series. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
22.
EttlieJohn E. (1983), “Organizational Policy and Innovation Among Suppliers to the Food Processing Sector,”Academy of Management Journal, 26 (1), 27–44.
23.
FangEric (Er) (2008), “Customer Participation and the Trade-Off Between New Product Innovativeness and Speed to Market,”Journal of Marketing, 72 (July), 90–104.
24.
FangEric (Er), PalmatierRobert W., and GrewalRajdeep (2011), “Effects of Customer and Innovation Asset Configuration Strategies on Firm Performance,”Journal of Marketing Research, 48 (May), 587–602.
25.
FreemanLinton C. (1979), “Centrality in Social Networks Conceptual Clarification,”Social Networks, 1 (3), 215–39.
26.
FreemanLinton C., BorgattiStephen P., and WhiteDouglas R. (1991), “Centrality in Valued Graphs: A Measure of Betweenness Based on Network Flow,”Social Networks, 13 (2), 141–54.
27.
GrabherGernot (1993), “The Weakness of Strong Ties: The Lock-In of Regional Development in the Ruhr Area,” in The Embedded Firm: On the Socioeconomics of Industrial Networks, GrabherGernot, ed. London: Routledge, 255–77.
28.
GrantRobert M. (1996), “Toward a Knowledge-Based Theory of the Firm,”Strategic Management Journal, 17, 109–22.
29.
GrilichesZvi, ed. (1984), R&D, Patents, and Productivity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
GulatiRanjay and GargiuloMartin (1999), “Where Do Interorganizational Networks Come From?”American Journal of Sociology, 104 (5), 1439–93.
31.
HanJin K, KimNamwoon, and KimHong-Bumm (2001), “Entry Barriers: A Dull-, One-, or Two-Edged Sword for Incumbents? Unraveling the Paradox from a Contingency Perspective,”Journal of Marketing, 65 (January), 1–14.
32.
HansenLars Peter (1982), “Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators,”Econometrica, 50 (4), 1029–54.
33.
HansenMorten T. (1999), “The Search-Transfer Problem: The Role of Weak Ties in Sharing Knowledge Across Organization Subunits,”Administrative Science Quarterly, 44 (1), 82–111.
34.
HargadonAndrew and SuttonRobert I. (1997), “Technology Brokering and Innovation in a Product Development Firm,”Administrative Science Quarterly, 42 (4), 716–49.
35.
JapSandy D. (1999), “Pie-Expansion Efforts: Collaboration Processes in Buyer–Supplier Relationships,”Journal of Marketing Research, 36 (December), 461–75.
36.
KalaignanamKartik, ShankarVenkatesh, and VaradarajanRajan (2007), “Asymmetric New Product Development Alliances: Win-Win or Win-Lose Partnerships?”Management Science, 53 (3), 357–74.
37.
KogutBruce (2000), “The Network as Knowledge: Generative Rules and the Emergence of Structure,”Strategic Management Journal, 21 (3), 404–25.
38.
KogutBruce and ZanderUdo (1992), “Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology,”Organization Science, 3 (3), 383–97.
39.
LanePeter J. and LubatkinMichael (1998), “Relative Absorptive Capacity and Interorganizational Learning,”Strategic Management Journal, 19 (5), 461–77.
40.
LavieDovev and MillerStewart R. (2008), “Alliance Portfolio Internationalization and Firm Performance,”Organization Science, 19 (4), 623–46.
41.
LeeJongkuk (2011), “The Alignment of Contract Terms for Knowledge-Creating and Knowledge-Appropriating Relationship Portfolios,”Journal of Marketing, 75 (July), 110–27.
42.
MallapragadaGirish, GrewalRajdeep, and LilienGary (2012), “User-Generated Open Source Products: Founder's Social Capital and Time to Product Release,”Marketing Science, 31 (3), 474–92.
43.
McAlisterLeigh, SrinivasanRaji, and KimMinChung (2007), “Advertising, Research and Development, and Systematic Risk of the Firm,”Journal of Marketing, 71 (January), 35–48.
44.
MongePeter R. and ContractorNoshir S. (2003), Theories of Communication Networks. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
45.
MoranPeter (2005), “Structural Vs. Relational Embeddedness: Social Capital and Managerial Performance,”Strategic Management Journal, 26 (December), 1129–51.
46.
MoweryDavid C., OxleyJoanne E., and SilvermanBrian S. (1996), “Strategic Alliances and Interfirm Knowledge Transfer,”Strategic Management Journal, 17 (S2), 77–91.
47.
NarasimhanOm, RajivSurendra, and DuttaShantanu (2006), “Absorptive Capacity in High-Technology Markets: The Competitive Advantage of the Haves,”Marketing Science, 25 (5), 510–24.
48.
ObstfeldDavid (2005), “Social Networks, the Tertius Iungens Orientation, and Involvement in Innovation,”Administrative Science Quarterly, 50 (1), 100–30.
49.
Owen-SmithJason and PowellWalter W. (2004), “Knowledge Networks as Channels and Conduits: The Effects of Spillovers in the Boston Biotechnology Community,”Organization Science, 15 (1), 5–21.
50.
PakesAriel and GrilichesZvi (1984), “Patents and R&D at the Firm Level: A First Look,” in R&D, Patents, and Productivity, GrilichesZvi, ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
51.
PhelpsCorey, HeidlRalph, and WadhwaAnu (2012), “Knowledge, Networks, and Knowledge Networks: A Review and Research Agenda,”Journal of Management, 38 (4), 1115–66.
52.
RoodmanDavid (2009), “How to Do Xtabond2: An Introduction to Difference and System GMM in Stata,”Stata Journal, 9 (1), 86.
53.
RowleyTim, BehrensDean, and KrackhardtDavid (2000), “Redundant Governance Structures: An Analysis of Structural and Relational Embeddedness in the Steel and Semiconductor Industries,”Strategic Management Journal, 21 (3), 369–86.
54.
SampsonRachelle C. (2007), “R&D Alliances & Firm Performance: The Impact of Technological Diversity and Alliance Organization on Innovation,”Academy of Management Journal, 50 (2), 364–86.
55.
SchillingMelissa A. and PhelpsCorey C. (2007), “Interfirm Collaboration Networks: The Impact of Large-Scale Network Structure on Firm Innovation,”Management Science, 53 (7), 1113–26.
56.
SorescuAlina B. and SpanjolJelena (2008), “Innovation's Effect on Firm Value and Risk: Insights from Consumer Packaged Goods,”Journal of Marketing, 72 (March), 114–32.
57.
SteenkampJan-Benedict E.M. and FangEric (Er) (2011), “The Impact of Economic Contractions on the Effectiveness of R&D and Advertising: Evidence from U.S. Companies Spanning Three Decades,”Marketing Science, 30 (4), 628–45.
58.
StephensonKaren and ZelenMarvin (1989), “Rethinking Centrality: Methods and Examples,”Social Networks, 11 (1), 1–37.
59.
StuartToby 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 (8), 791–811.
60.
SubramaniamMohan and YoundtMark A. (2005), “The Influence of Intellectual Capital on the Types of Innovation Capabilities,”Academy of Management Journal, 48 (3), 450–63.
61.
SwaminathanVanitha and MoormanChristine (2009), “Marketing Alliances, Firm Networks, and Firm Value Creation,”Journal of Marketing, 73 (September), 52–69.
62.
TeeceDavid J. (2007), “Explicating Dynamic Capabilities: The Nature and Microfoundations of (Sustainable) Enterprise Performance,”Strategic Management Journal, 28 (13), 1319–50.
63.
TsaiWenpin (2001), “Knowledge Transfer in Intraorganizational Networks: Effects of Network Position and Absorptive Capacity on Business Unit Innovation and Performance,”Academy of Management Journal, 44 (5), 996.
64.
TushmanMichael L. and KatzRalph (1980), “External Communication and Project Performance: An Investigation into the Role of Gatekeepers,”Management Science, 26 (11), 1071–85.
65.
Van BeersCees and ZandFardad (2014), “R&D Cooperation, Partner Diversity, and Innovation Performance: An Empirical Analysis,”Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31 (2), 292–312.
66.
Van den BulteChristophe and WuytsStefan (2007), Social Networks and Marketing. Relevant Knowledge Series. Cambridge, MA: Marketing Science Institute.
67.
WuytsStefan, DuttaShantanu, and StremerschStefan (2004), “Portfolios of Interfirm Agreements in Technology-Intensive Markets: Consequences for Innovation and Profitability,”Journal of Marketing, 68 (April), 88–100.
68.
XiongGuiyang and BharadwajSundar (2011), “Social Capital of Young Technology Firms and Their IPO Values: The Complementary Role of Relevant Absorptive Capacity,”Journal of Marketing, 75 (November), 87–104.
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.
