Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation

Kneeland, Madeline King; Schilling, Melissa A.; Aharonson, Barak S.

doi:10.1287/orsc.2019.1328

Cited by 74 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 61 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Here novelty detection is accomplished by modeling the probability density function of possible observations and regarding an observation as novel if it falls in a region of low enough estimated density (according to a given threshold). Recent scholarship on the search trajectories leading to outlier inventions is indicative of the theoretical gains that the analysis of outliers can yield in the context of innovation-oriented organizational research (Kneeland et al, 2020)…”

Section: Moving Ahead In Seeing Noveltymentioning

confidence: 99%

Novelty: Searching for, Seeing, and Sustaining it

Cattani¹,

Deichmann²,

Ferriani³

2022

The Generation, Recognition and Legitimation of Novelty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The journey of novelty -from the moment it arises to the time it takes hold -is an exciting but also often a problematic one. A new entity, to be recognized as such, needs to be differentiated from what existed before. However, novelty poses cognitive challenges that hamper its appreciation since it is difficult to form expectations about and make sense of something genuinely new. And since novel ideas, products, technologies, or organizational forms often violate existing practices and social structures, they are usually met with skepticism and resistance. In this introductory piece, we take stock of research into the challenges of generating, recognizing, and legitimating novelty. We review each volume chapter and highlight the new perspectives and insights they offer about how individuals, teams, and organizations search for novelty, see novelty, and sustain novelty. Finally, we outline several research themes that, we believe, are worthy of further scholarly attention.

show abstract

Section: Moving Ahead In Seeing Noveltymentioning

confidence: 99%

Novelty: Searching for, Seeing, and Sustaining it

Cattani¹,

Deichmann²,

Ferriani³

2022

The Generation, Recognition and Legitimation of Novelty

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The process of knowledge search is an evolving dynamic time series (Kneeland et al , 2020). It begins after the motivation formed and ends with the cross-border knowledge entering into the organization.…”

Section: Literature Review and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Based on the practice of HOPE, cross-border knowledge in this article refers specifically to technological knowledge that crosses industrial and cognitive boundaries. It is the uncharted territory in the technology landscape and is very distant from what is known and well understood (Kneeland et al ,2020). This kind of knowledge can make “long jumps” (Kauffman, 1993; Levinthal, 1997).…”

Section: Literature Review and Theoretical Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cross-border knowledge search and integration mechanism – a case study of Haier open partnership ecosystem (HOPE)

Gao

Teng

et al. 2021

CMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Because of the complexity of technological innovation and the dynamics of the technological environment, it is impossible for a single firm to have all knowledge needed for technological innovation, making it essential for firms to conduct cross-border knowledge search and integration. However, it is very difficult for firms to acquire and assimilate cross-border knowledge. The purpose of this paper is to explore how an open innovation platform (OIP) helps firms to effectively search and integrate cross-border knowledge, and to understand the key roles that OIP plays during the cross-border knowledge search and integration processes. Design/methodology/approach This paper takes the case analysis method, which provides a comprehensively understanding on the complex process of cross-border knowledge search and integration as well as the internal mechanism. Drawing on the research paradigm of Eisenhardt (1989), Bakker and Akkerman (2014), this paper analyzes and verifies the mechanism of OIP cross-border knowledge search and integration based on extensive interviews. Findings First, this paper analyzes the process of cross-border knowledge search and integration through Haier open partnership ecosystem (HOPE), which is theoretically divided into three stages, including motivation formation, cross-border knowledge search and integration. These three stages have been further decomposed into the following seven steps: demands discovery, problems definition, problems decomposition, resource search, resource evaluation, technology redevelopment and test. In addition, this study investigates the manifestation of interrelationships among these stages and steps, depicting the pathways through which HOPE facilitates the firm’s cross-border knowledge search and integration. The conclusions indicate that OIP timely discovers the consumer demands during the motivation formation stage, effectively decomposes problems and find related technology resources during the search stage and improves the efficacy of integration stage. Research limitations/implications This study reveals the mechanism of OIP cross-border knowledge search and integration and draws some valuable conclusions, which contribute to the literature on cross-border knowledge search, enrich the research on problem-solving and also propose a new perspective to study the roles of OIP on innovation. However, there are still some limitations. First, this study is built on a single platform (HOPE), further studies may focus on more platforms to ensure the conclusions of this paper. Second, this study conducts data analysis using a simple encoding analysis, so it is possible that some critical information is emitted while collating and analyzing data. Meanwhile, for the research methods, qualitative and quantitative methods can be combined to analyze related issues, then the correlation and corresponding mechanism can be incorporated into the same framework to further verify the conclusions and generalize the results. Practical implications This paper theoretically analyzes how and why HOPE helps firms search and integrate cross-border knowledge. It provides not only a reference for OIP but also a proven and effective way for companies’ acquiring and integrating cross-border knowledge. Then it will further improve firms’ innovative abilities, especially disruptive innovation abilities. Social implications Technological innovation, especially disruptive innovation is not only a driving force of firms’ sustainable development but also a vital driver of national development. This paper clarified that OIP can help firms conduct successful disruptive innovation through cross-border knowledge search and integration, which will further increase national innovative competence and improve social welfare. Originality/value This paper extends the literature on the process of cross-border knowledge search and integration, as well as the roles of OIP. From a managerial standpoint, the conclusions have practical implications for firms to successfully acquire and integrate cross-border knowledge.

show abstract

“…The benefits of collaboration are considerable. By bringing together individuals with different knowledge, opinions, skills, and resources, collaboration enables cross-fertilization and recombination of ideas (Hargadon and Sutton 1997;Toh and Polidoro 2013;Choudhury and Haas 2018;Kneeland, Schilling, and Aharonson 2020). It also enables specialization and a productive division of labor whereby individuals focus on what they can do best, thereby potentially increasing productivity for all (Jones 2009;Reagans, Miron-Spektor, and Argote 2016).…”

Section: Collaboration As a Choicementioning

confidence: 99%

Detrimental Collaborations in Creative Work: Evidence from Economics

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prior research on collaboration and creativity often assumes that individuals choose to collaborate to improve the quality of their output. Given the growing role of collaboration and autonomous teams in creative work, the validity of this assumption has important implications for organizations. We argue that in the presence of a collaboration credit premium-when the sum of fractional credit allocated to each collaborator exceeds 100%-individuals may choose to work together even when the project output is of low quality or when its prospects are diminished by collaborating. We test our argument on a sample of economists in academia using the norm of alphabetical ordering of authors' surnames on academic articles as an instrument for selection into collaboration. This norm means that economists whose family name begins with a letter from the beginning of the alphabet receive systematically more credit for collaborative work than economists whose family name begins with a letter from the end of the alphabet. We show that, in the presence of a credit premium, individuals may choose to collaborate even if this choice decreases output quality. Thus, collaboration can create a misalignment between the incentives of creative workers and the prospects of the project.

show abstract

Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation

Cited by 74 publications

References 61 publications

Novelty: Searching for, Seeing, and Sustaining it

Novelty: Searching for, Seeing, and Sustaining it

Cross-border knowledge search and integration mechanism – a case study of Haier open partnership ecosystem (HOPE)

Detrimental Collaborations in Creative Work: Evidence from Economics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About