Knowledge Exchange in Intra-Organizational Innovation Communities: The Role of Cognitive and Affective States

Bansemir, Bastian; Neyer, Anne‐Katrin; Möslein, Kathrin M.

doi:10.1007/bf03342731

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The collected data indicates that the use of boundary objects was driven by technologically induced self‐efficacy (cf. Bansemir et al, ). In this sense, our research extends the work of e.g.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging knowledge boundaries: the use of boundary objects in virtual innovation communities

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explore objects which are used to span knowledge boundaries (Carlile, ) in order to establish shared understanding in virtual innovation communities. In particular, the use of a mix of such boundary objects during collaboration on a virtual whiteboard is studied. Five collaborations with in total 31 participants are analyzed on the micro level of activities. We conceptualize collaboration activities according to Dennis et al. () as conveyance of information and convergence on meaning. Both, conveyance and convergence activities are necessary to establish shared understanding. Our results show why and how boundary objects are used specific to conveyance or convergence activities. We, thus, provide confirmative empirical evidence for the theoretical propositions of Dennis et al. () and extend current research on knowledge sharing in virtual innovation by showing how exactly boundary objects contribute. Practical implications include propositions for the design of collaboration platforms and innovation processes.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bridging knowledge boundaries: the use of boundary objects in virtual innovation communities

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…An important contribution of our article is to show how psychological factors can influence knowledge exchanges (Bansemir et al, ). We also contribute to the interorganizational learning literature (Hamel, ; Larsson et al, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The framing of knowledge transfers to shared R&D suppliers and its impact on innovation performance: a regulatory focus perspective

Martínez‐Noya

Canal

2015

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When outsourcing research and development (R&D) services, fears of knowledge leakage can make client firms reluctant to transfer knowledge to their suppliers, even at the cost of reducing the performance of the agreement. Outsourcing to R&D suppliers shared with competitors ensures relying on refined capabilities due to the aggregation of the demands of related clients, but also aggravates this interorganizational learning dilemma. Taking a regulatory focus perspective, we argue that the client's commitment to the process of knowledge transfer with a shared supplier will depend on whether the relationship is framed with a promotion or a prevention focus. Using primary data at the transaction level from a survey conducted among 170 European and US technological firms, we find that sharing suppliers with competitors only boosts the client's innovative performance when outsourcing R&D services that do not require the transfer of tacit and firm‐specific knowledge. Otherwise, the appropriability hazards involved will make the firm frame the relationship with a prevention focus limiting the client's ability to achieve its innovation objectives.

show abstract

“…Innovation platforms often adopt the characteristics of communities, for example, mutual engagement, shared repertoires, shared objectives, and the voluntary participation and contribution of actors (Wendelken et al, ). In this paper, we focus on intra‐organizational innovation, whose platform characteristics are described by Bansemir, Neyer and Möslein (, p. 44) as: (i) a shared purpose to search, select, and develop innovations in line with an organization's strategic objectives; (ii) membership limited to employees of a specific organization; (iii) interaction and communication of members that primarily take place on platforms; and (iv) the lack of sustained and ongoing mutual relationships as well as mutual interdependence. This definition highlights employees' online and offline connections within firms' boundaries, focusing on the development of innovations through technological platforms.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring employee interactions and quality of contributions in intra‐organisational innovation platforms

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study builds on the innovation management and organizational knowledge networks to examine the user interactions in an intra‐organizational innovation platform of a Norwegian telecommunications operator, as well as the influence of user interactions on idea development. Although current studies mainly focus on user interactions and idea quality in innovation processes, little attention has been paid to the layered nature of user interactions that impact on idea development. Data from an intra‐organizational innovation platform, called Explorathon, was used in an exploratory study, with a mixed‐methods approach. For 10 days, 3200 employees posted 390 ideas, with 1435 comments. Results show that employees communicated through the innovation platform with 11 interaction types, eight contribution types and three collaboration types. The findings demonstrate that diverse platform interactions coexist and have a diverse impact on ideas. The authors suggest three types of contribution qualities—passive, efficient and balanced—that reflect the degree of meaningful interactions around an idea. The contribution qualities are only indicative of the content of interactions and they complement other evaluation metrics of the innovation platform. The findings also suggest that the user roles of idea contributors and platform moderators or facilitators are significant in maintaining interactions and weighted contributions over time. The study has implications both for research and practice.

show abstract

Knowledge Exchange in Intra-Organizational Innovation Communities: The Role of Cognitive and Affective States

Cited by 16 publications

References 53 publications

Bridging knowledge boundaries: the use of boundary objects in virtual innovation communities

Bridging knowledge boundaries: the use of boundary objects in virtual innovation communities

The framing of knowledge transfers to shared R&D suppliers and its impact on innovation performance: a regulatory focus perspective

Exploring employee interactions and quality of contributions in intra‐organisational innovation platforms

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About