Open to suggestions: How organizations elicit suggestions through proactive and reactive attention

Research Policy

Volumn 43, Issue 5, 2014, Pages 812-827

  Dahlander, Linus ^a   Piezunka, Henning ^b  

^a EUROPEAN SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT AND TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Attention; Ideation; Open innovation; Openness; Social media; Success bias; Suggestions; User innovation

Indexed keywords

INNOVATION; KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT;

ATTENTION; IDEATION; OPEN INNOVATION; OPENNESS; SOCIAL MEDIA; SUCCESS BIAS; SUGGESTIONS; USER INNOVATION;

SOCIETIES AND INSTITUTIONS;

EID: 84899635186     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.06.006     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Afuah, A., Tucci, C., 2012. Crowdsourcing as solution to distant search. Academy of Management Review 37, 355-375.
2. Ahuja, G., Katila, R., 2004. Where do resources come from? The role of idiosyncraticsituations. Strategic Management Journal 25, 887-907.
3. Alexy, O., George, G., Salter, A., 2013. Cui bono? The selective revealing of knowledgeand its implications for innovative activity. Academy of Management Review 38,270-291.
4. Alexy, O., Salter, A., Criscuolo, P., 2012. No soliciting: strategies for managing unso-licited innovative ideas. California Management Review 54, 116-139.
5. Arora, A., Nandkumar, A., 2011. Cash-out or flameout! Opportunity cost andentrepreneurial strategy: theory, and evidence from the information securityindustry. Management Science 57, 1844-1860.
6. Barker, J.R., 1993. Tightening the iron cage: concertive control in self managingteams. Administrative Science Quarterly 38, 408-437.
7. Barnard, C., 1938. The Functions of the Executive. Harvard University Press,Cambridge, MA.
8. Bayus, B.L., 2013. Crowdsourcing new product ideas over time: an analysis of theDell IdeaStorm community. Management Science 59, 226-244.
9. Becker, S., Kaiser, S., Latsch, G., Schmidt, F., Theile, M., 2012. Selbst entzaubert. DerSpiegel 43, 30-32.
10. Blau, P.M., 1963. Consultation Among Colleagues, Dynamics of Bureaucracy. ChicagoUniversity Press, Chicago, pp. 157-169.
11. Bogers, M., Afuah, A., Bastian, B., 2010. Users as innovators: a review, critique, andfuture research directions. Journal of Management 36, 857-875.
12. Brown, S.L., Eisenhardt, K.M., 1997. The art of continuous change: linking com-plexity theory and time-paced evolution in relentlessly shifting organizations.Administrative Science Quarterly 42, 1-34.
13. Cameron, A.C., Trivedi, P.K., 1986. Econometric models based on count data: com-parisons and applications of some estimators and tests. Journal of AppliedEconometrics 1, 29-53.
14. Chesbrough, H., 2003. Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Prof-iting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
15. Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., West, J., 2006. Open Innovation: Researching aNew Paradigm. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
16. Cialdini, R.B., Reno, R.R., Kallgren, C.A., 1990. A focus theory of normative conduct:recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology 58, 1015-1026.
17. Cohen, W.M., Levinthal, D.A., 1990. Absorptive capacity: a new perspective on learn-ing and innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 15, 128-152.
18. Dahlander, L., Frederiksen, L., 2012. The core and cosmopolitans: a relational viewof innovation in user communities. Organization Science 23, 988-1007.
19. Dahlander, L., Gann, D.M., 2010. How open is innovation? Research Policy 39,699-709.
20. Dahlander, L., Magnusson, M.G., 2005. Relationships between open source softwarecompanies and communities: observations from Nordic firms. Research Policy34, 481-493.
21. Dahlander, L., O'Mahony, S., 2011. Progressing to the center: coordinating projectwork. Organization Science 22, 961-979.
22. Dahlander, L., Wallin, M.W., 2006. A man on the inside: unlocking communities ascomplementary assets. Research Policy 35, 1243-1259.
23. Davis, J.P., Eisenhardt, K.M., 2011. Rotating leadership and collaborative innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly 56, 159-201.
24. Denrell, J., 2003. Vicarious learning, undersampling of failure, and the myths ofmanagement. Organization Science 14, 227-243.
25. Denrell, J., 2005. Selection bias and the perils of benchmarking. Harvard BusinessReview 83, 114-119.
26. Denrell, J., Kovacs, B., 2008. Selective sampling of empirical settings in organizationalstudies. Administrative Science Quarterly 53, 109-144.
27. Eisenhardt, K.M., 1989. Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environ-ments. Academy of Management Journal 32, 543-576.
28. Eisenhardt, K., Piezunka, H., 2011. Complexity and corporate strategy. In: Allen, P.,Maguire, S., McKelvey, B. (Eds.), Sage Handbook of Complexity and Management,pp. 506-523.
29. Enkel, E., Gassmann, O., Chesbrough, H., 2009. Open R&D and open innovation:exploring the phenomenon. R&D Management 39, 311-316.
30. Faraj, S., Johnson, S.L., 2011. Network exchange patterns in online communities. Organization Science 22, 1464-1480.
31. Felin, T., Zenger, T.R., 2012. Open and closed innovation, problem solving and gov-ernance choice. SSRN Working Paper Series.
32. Foss, N.J., Laursen, K., Pedersen, T., 2011. Linking customer interaction and innova-tion: the mediating role of new organizational practices. Organization Science22, 980-999.
33. Franke, N., von Hippel, E., 2003. Satisfying heterogeneous user needs via innovationtoolkits: the case of Apache Security Software. Research Policy 32, 1199-1215.
34. Freeman, C., 1968. Chemical process plant: innovation and the world market. National Institute Economic Review 45, 29-51.
35. Graffin, S.D., Wade, J.B., Porac, J.F., McNamee, R.C., 2008. The impact of CEO statusdiffusion on the economic outcomes of other senior managers. OrganizationScience 19, 457-474.
36. Granovetter, M., 1978. Threshold models of collective behavior. American Journal ofSociology 83, 1420-1443.
37. Greve, H.R., Rao, H., 2012. Echoes of the past: organizational foundings as sourcesof an institutional legacy of mutualism. American Journal of Sociology 118,635-675.
38. Gruber, M., MacMillan, I., Thompson, J., 2008. Look before you leap: market oppor-tunity identification in emerging technology firms. Management Science 54,1652-1665.
39. Hargadon, A., Sutton, R.I., 1997. Technology brokering and innovation in a productdevelopment firm. Administrative Science Quarterly 42, 716-749.
40. Harhoff, D., Henkel, J., von Hippel, E., 2003. Profiting from voluntary informationspillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations. ResearchPolicy 32, 1753-1769.
41. Heckman, J.J., Borjas, G.J., 1980. Does unemployment cause future unemployment:definitions, questions, and answers from a continuous time model of hetero-geneity and state dependence. Econometrica 48, 247-283.
42. Henkel, J.J., 2006. Selective revealing in open innovation processes: the case ofembedded Linux. Research Policy 35, 953-969.
43. Hirschman, A.O., 1970. Exit, Voice, and Loyalty: Responses to Decline in Firms, Orga-nizations, and States. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
44. Huberman, B.A., Romero, D.M., Wu, F., 2009. Crowdsourcing, attention and produc-tivity. Journal of Information Science 35, 758-765.
45. Jeppesen, L.B., Frederiksen, L., 2006. Why do users contribute to firm-hosted usercommunities? The case of computer-controlled music instruments. Organiza-tion Science 17, 45-66.
46. Jeppesen, L.B., Lakhani, K.R., 2010. Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness inbroadcast search. Organization Science 21, 1016-1033.
47. Kairam, S.R., Wang, D.J., Leskovec, J., 2012. The life and death of online groups:Predicting group growth and longevity. In: Proceedings of the Fifth ACM Inter-national Conference on Web Search and Data Mining, ACM, Seattle, Washington,USA, pp. 673-682.
48. Katila, R., Chen, E., Piezunka, H., 2012. All the right moves: how entrepreneurs com-pete effectively in new and old markets. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal 6,116-132.
49. Kogut, B., Metiu, A., 2001. Open-source software development and distributed inno-vation. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 17, 248-264.
50. Krackhardt, D., Carley, K.M., 1998. A PCANS model of structure in organization. In:Proceedings of the 1998 International Symposium on Command and ControlResearch.
51. Kuhn, T.S., 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press,Chicago.
52. Lakhani, K.R., von Hippel, E., 2003. How open source software works: free user-to-user assistance. Research Policy 32, 923-943.
53. Latane, B., Darley, J.M., 1969. Bystander apathy. American Scientist 57, 244-268.
54. Laursen, K., Salter, A., 2006. Open for innovation: the role of openness in explaininginnovation performance among U.K. manufacturing firms. Strategic Manage-ment Journal 27, 131-150.
55. Lawrence, T.B., Winn, M.I., Jennings, P.D., 2001. The temporal dynamics of institu-tionalization. Academy of Management Review 26, 624-644.
56. Lee, S., Park, G., Yoon, B., Park, J., 2010. Open innovation in SMEs: an intermediatednetwork model. Research Policy 39, 290-300.
57. Lifshitz-Assaf, 2013. From problem solving to solution seeking: The co-evolutionof knowledge boundary work and professional identity and capabilities ofR&D organizational members at NASA. Harvard Business School workingpaper.
58. March, J.G., 1991. Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organi-zation Science 2, 71-87.
59. Monteiro, L.F., Arvidsson, N., Birkinshaw, J., 2008. Knowledge flows within multi-national corporations: explaining subsidiary isolation and its performanceimplications. Organization Science 19, 90-107.
60. Morozov, E., 2013. Why social movements should ignore social media. NewRepublic (downloaded on 20 February 2013 from http://www.newrepublic.com/ article/112189/social-media-doesnt-always-help-social-movements).
61. Nalebuff, B., Ayres, I., 2004. Encouraging suggestive behavior. Harvard BusinessReview 82, 18.
62. O'Mahony, S., Ferraro, F., 2007. The emergence of governance in an open sourcecommunity. Academy of Management Journal 50, 1079-1106.
63. O'Mahony, S., Lakhani, K., 2011. Organizations in the shadow of communities. Research in the Sociology of Organizations 33, 3-36.
64. Piezunka, H., Dahlander, L., 2013. Attentional shift: a study of organization's atten-tion to suggestion. Working Paper. Stanford University.
65. Piller, F.T., Walcher, D., 2006. Toolkits for idea competitions: a novel methodto integrate users in new product development. R&D Management 36, 307-318.
66. Powell, W.W., Grodal, S., 2005. Networks of innovators. In: Fagerberg, J., Mowery,D.C., Nelson, R.R. (Eds.), Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford University Press,Oxford, pp. 56-85.
67. Powell, W.W., Koput, K.W., Smith-Doer, L., 1996. Interorganizational collaborationand the locus of innovation: networks of learning in biotechnology. Administra-tive Science Quarterly 41, 116.
68. Raymond, E.S., 2001. The Cathedral and the Bazaar: Musings on Linux and OpenSource by an Accidental Revolutionary. O'Reilly & Associates, CA, USA.
69. Reitzig, M., Sorenson, O., 2013. Biases in the selection stage of bottom-up strategyformulation. Strategic Management Journal 34, 782-799.
70. Rosenkopf, L., Almeida, P., 2003. Overcoming local search through alliances andmobility. Management Science 49, 751-766.
71. Shah, S.K., 2006. Motivation, governance, and the viability of hybrid forms in opensource software development. Management Science 52, 1000-1014.
72. Shane, S., 2000. Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science 11, 448-469.
73. Stam, W., 2009. When does community participation enhance the performance ofopen source software companies? Research Policy 38, 1288-1299.
74. Staudenmayer, N., Tripsas, M., Tucci, C., 2005. Interfirm modularity and its implica-tions for product development. Journal of Product Innovation Management 22,303-321.
75. Sterman, J., Wittenberg, J., 1999. Self organization, competition and suc-cess in the dynamics of scientific revolution. Organization Science 10,322-341.
76. Sterman, J.D., Henderson, R., Beinhocker, E.D., Newman, L.I., 2007. Getting big toofast: strategic dynamics with increasing returns and bounded rationality. Man-agement Science 53, 683-696.
77. Stuart, T., 2000. Interorganizational alliances and the performance of firms: a studyof growth and innovation rates in a high-technology industry. Strategic Man-agement Journal 21, 791-811.
78. Stuermer, M., Spaeth, S., von Krogh, G., 2009. Extending private-collective innova-tion: a case study. R&D Management 39, 170-191.
79. von Hippel, E., 1976. The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument inno-vation process. Research Policy 5, 212-239.
80. von Hippel, E., 1987. Cooperation between rivals: informal know-how trading. Research Policy 16, 291-302.
81. von Hippel, E., 1988. The Sources of Innovation. Oxford University Press, New York.
82. von Hippel, E., 2005. Democratizing Innovation. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
83. von Krogh, G., Spaeth, S., Lakhani, K.R., 2003. Community joining, and special-ization in open source software innovation: a case study. Research Policy 32,1217-1241.
84. Waguespack, D.M., Fleming, L., 2009. Scanning the commons? Evidence on the ben-efits of startups participating in open standards development. ManagementScience 55, 210-223.
85. Wallin, M., von Krogh, G., Sieg, J.H., 2012. A problem in becoming: how firms for-mulate sharable problems for innovation contests. In: Open Innovation: NewInsights and Evidence Conference, London.
86. West, J., Bogers, M., 2013. Leveraging external sources of innovation: a review ofresearch on open innovation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, Forth-coming.
87. West, J., Gallagher, S., 2006. Challenges of open innovation: the paradox of firminvestment in open-source software. R&D Management 36, 319-331.
88. West, J., Lakhani, K.R., 2008. Getting clear about communities in open innovation. Industry and Innovation 15, 223-231.
89. West, J., Vanhaverbeke, W., Chesbrough, H., 2006. Open innovation: a researchagenda. In: Chesbrough, H., Vanhaverbeke, W., West, J. (Eds.), Open Innovation:Researching a New Paradigm. Oxford University Press, New York.
90. Westphal, J.D., Zajac, E.J., 1998. The symbolic management of stockholders: cor-porate governance reforms and shareholder reactions. Administrative ScienceQuarterly 43, 127-153.
91. Zbaracki, M., 1998. The rhetoric and reality of total quality management. Adminis-trative Science Quarterly 43, 602-636.
92. Zoominfo, 2012. Zoominfo Database (downloaded on 1 December 2012 fromhttp://www.zoominfo.com/business/overview/database.html).
93. Zucker, L., 1977. The role of institutionalization in cultural persistence. AmericanSociological Review 42, 726-743.