@article{Leede.2005, title = {Innovation and HRM: Towards an Integrated Framework}, author = {Jan de Leede and Jan Kees Looise}, journal = {Creativity & Innovation Management}, number = 2, pages = {108-117}, volume = 14, year = 2005, issn = {0963-1690}, abstract = {This paper explores the connection between innovation (management) and human resource management. Much has been written about the both concepts separately, but there is no integrated conceptual framework available for the combination of the two. Our goal here is to develop such a framework. We do this in a number of steps, starting with a presentation of the existing approaches and models with respect to innovation (management) and HRM. This is followed by a search for the linkage between the two traditions, as a starting point for an integrated model and an in-depth case study regarding the link between innovation and HRM, in order to further develop our model. We conclude with the presentation of our model and with suggestions for further research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2018b6cb21860c82ef7872a415b4a92fe/callagialla}, keywords = {innovationsKNOWLEDGE managementCASE frames managementTECHNOLOGICAL PERSONNEL managementSTRUCTURAL studiesRESOURCE} } @article{Tranfield.2003, title = {Knowledge Management Routines for Innovation Projects: Developing a Hierarchical Process Model}, author = {David Tranfield and Malcolm Young and David Partington and John Bessant and Jonathan Sapsed}, journal = {International Journal of Innovation Management}, number = 1, pages = {27-49}, volume = 7, year = 2003, issn = {1363-9196}, abstract = {In this paper we use the literature on knowledge management and innovation, together with empirical data, to develop a process model for knowledge management routines in the context of innovation projects. First we develop a high-level conceptualisation from the literature, the model characterising knowledge management as consisting of three distinct phases: Discovery, Realisation and Nurture. We then expand this three phase perspective into a model of generic knowledge management routines, reporting four contrasting, exemplar cases from a wide ranging study across business sectors. Using the notions of radical and incremental innovation in both products and processes we illustrate how the three high-level phases may be further expanded into a more detailed conceptualisation of the knowledge management process. This comprises eight generic routines: Search, Capture, Articulate, Contextualise, Apply, Evaluate, Support and Re-innovate. We derive a new description of knowledge management and discuss the practical implications of the model, including the opportunities which exist for cross-sector learning between organisations which are superficially dissimilar. We conclude that the successful management of organisational knowledge in the context of innovation requires attention to be paid to all eight generic routines and to the influence of enablers and blockers operating both inside and outside the framework of routines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2289f2adcf2ad2cfd4754a509be015128/callagialla}, keywords = {management innovationsKNOWLEDGE BusinessOrganizational behaviorTECHNOLOGICAL} } @article{Shipton.2005, title = {Managing People to Promote Innovation}, author = {Helen Shipton and Doris Fay and Michael West and Malcolm Patterson and Kamal Birdi}, journal = {Creativity & Innovation Management}, number = 2, pages = {118-128}, volume = 14, year = 2005, issn = {0963-1690}, abstract = {There is growing evidence available to suggest that Human Resource Management (HRM) practice is an important predictor of organizational performance. Drawing upon organizational learning perspectives, we argue that HRM systems also have the potential to promote organizational innovation. We present longitudinal data from thirty-five UK manufacturing organizations to suggest that effective HRM systems– incorporating sophisticated approaches to recruitment and selection, induction, appraisal and training– predict organizational innovation in products and production technology. We further show that organizational innovation is enhanced where there is a supportive learning climate, and inhibited (for innovation in production processes) where there is a link between appraisal and remuneration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2e4eded203acacf1524e24a89df4e3398/callagialla}, keywords = {scienceMANUFACTURING innovationsKNOWLEDGE managementPEOPLE processesORGANIZATIONAL learningTECHNOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT} } @article{Sherman.2005, title = {New Product Development Performance and the Interaction of Cross-Functional Integration and Knowledge Management}, author = {J. Daniel Sherman and David Berkowitz and William E. Souder}, journal = {Journal of Product Innovation Management}, number = 5, pages = {399-411}, volume = 22, year = 2005, issn = {0737-6782}, abstract = {Previous research on cross-functional integration between research and development (R&D) &nd &arketing &as &ocused &n &he &evelopment &f &ppropriate &tructural &odes &nd &evels &f &ntegration &nd &ooperation &cross &he &&D–marketing interface. A gap in the previous research in this area has been the failure to investigate the integration of information from past related product development projects (i.e., knowledge management). In this investigation of R&D–marketing integration, variables from the emerging research literature on organizational learning and knowledge management are examined. By simultaneously investigating the effects of knowledge management variables and R&D–marketing integration, this gap in the literature is addressed. The results demonstrate that the combined effects of R&D–marketing integration and knowledge management in the form of recording, retrieving, and reviewing information from past projects results in interaction effects. In 8 of 18 tests interactions were found. In 6 of 18 tests these resulted in the form of amplification effects with dependent variables such as product prototype development proficiency, product launch proficiency, technological core competency fit, and design change frequency. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Journal of Product Innovation Management is the property of Blackwell Publishing Limited and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts) Previous research on cross-functional integration between research and development (R&D) &nd &arketing &as &ocused &n &he &evelopment &f &ppropriate &tructural &odes &nd &evels &f &ntegration &nd &ooperation &cross &he &&D–marketing interface. A gap in the previous research in this area has been the failure to investigate the integration of information from past related product development projects (i.e., knowledge management). In this investigation of R&D–marketing integration, variables from the emerging research literature on organizational learning and knowledge management are examined. By simultaneously investigating the effects of knowledge management variables and R&D–marketing integration, this gap in the literature is addressed. The results demonstrate that the combined effects of R&D–marketing integration and knowledge management in the form of recording, retrieving, and reviewing information from past projects results in interaction effects. In 8 of 18 tests interactions were found. In 6 of 18 tests these resulted in the form of amplification effects with dependent variables such as product prototype development proficiency, product launch proficiency, technological core competency fit, and design change frequency. ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR Copyright of Journal of Product Innovation Management is the property of Blackwell Publishing Limited and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2ad83bfd7b7c4d654805f56d35555dcf0/callagialla}, keywords = {innovationsKNOWLEDGE systemsNEW resources management managementINFORMATION productsPRODUCT managementTECHNOLOGICAL information INFORMATION technologyMANAGEMENT} } @article{Harhoff.2003, title = {Profiting From Voluntary Information Spillovers: How Users Benefit by Freely Revealing Their Innovations}, author = {Dietmar Harhoff and Joachim Henkel and Eric Von Hippel}, journal = {Research Policy}, number = 10, pages = {1753-1769}, volume = 32, year = 2003, abstract = {Empirical studies of innovation have found that end users frequently develop important product and process innovations. Defying conventional wisdom on the negative effects of uncompensated spillovers, innovative users also often openly reveal their innovations to competing users and to manufacturers. Rival users are thus in a position to reproduce the innovation in-house and benefit from using it, and manufacturers are in a position to refine the innovation and sell it to all users, including competitors of the user revealing its innovation. In this paper, we explore the incentives that users might have to freely reveal their proprietary innovations. We then develop a game-theoretic model to explore the effect of these incentives on users’ decisions to reveal or hide their proprietary information. We find that, under realistic parameter constellations, free revealing pays. We conclude by discussing some implications of our findings. Copyright 2003 Elsevier Copyright of Research Policy is the property of Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts) Empirical studies of innovation have found that end users frequently develop important product and process innovations. Defying conventional wisdom on the negative effects of uncompensated spillovers, innovative users also often openly reveal their innovations to competing users and to manufacturers. Rival users are thus in a position to reproduce the innovation in-house and benefit from using it, and manufacturers are in a position to refine the innovation and sell it to all users, including competitors of the user revealing its innovation. In this paper, we explore the incentives that users might have to freely reveal their proprietary innovations. We then develop a game-theoretic model to explore the effect of these incentives on users’ decisions to reveal or hide their proprietary information. We find that, under realistic parameter constellations, free revealing pays. We conclude by discussing some implications of our findings. Copyright 2003 Elsevier Copyright of Research Policy is the property of Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts)}, biburl = {http://www.bibsonomy.org/bibtex/2b5f2d6ba76281bd5220866e3945e1e85/callagialla}, keywords = {innovationsKNOWLEDGE BUSINESS enterprisesBUSINESSMENINCENTIVES managementinnovationSpilloversDIFFUSIONLead users industryTECHNOLOGICAL in} }