Social exchange in collaborative innovation: maker or breaker

Abstract

Collaborations in innovation work between competitors have become a common practice in the information and communication technology sector (ICT), and substantial investments are made in such collaborations. Significant rationales for these collaborations include the high expectations placed on rapid and front-edge technology development and business exploitation. However, there is often a failure to reach the expected outcomes of such collaborations. This may be explained not only by the challenges and obstacles in technology development but also by the social relations within the collaborations. The purpose of this study is to explore the role of social exchange in the outcomes of early-stage innovation collaborations. More specifically, we explore the social facilitators of exchange and how such facilitators may influence collaboration outcomes. Social exchange theory is used for this purpose. This longitudinal study is based on a 3-year collaboration project for innovation using qualitative methods (29 interviews, observations of 7 project meetings). Three phases of social exchange in the collaboration are empirically identified: the dating phase, brainstorming phase, and decision phase. Three social facilitators of social exchange within these phases are conceptualized: trust, commitment, and congruence. Further, direct contacts are conceptualized as a social accelerator fueling these social facilitators. This study advances understanding of social facilitators in social exchange and their significance with regard to success/ failure outcomes. Risks of lock-in situations in collaborations for innovation are outlined in a knowledge exchange paradox.

Establishing a partnership between top and IT managers

“…Yet, to start a collaboration, some form of social exchange is needed (Malmström and Johansson, 2016). Social exchange theory has already shown its potential to describe collaborations in innovation projects (Brass et al, 2004) and social exchange was proposed as a determining element of the success or failure of collaboration projects (Malmström and Johansson, 2016). Still, social exchange theory is considered one of the most influential conceptual paradigms for understanding workplace behaviour (Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005) and is developed on a cost-benefit viewpoint based on self-interest as a combination of economic and psychological needs (Homans, 1958).…”

“…measuring the partnership relation between organisations, were applied to the relationship between top management and IT personnel. Furthermore, to start a collaboration some form of social exchange is needed (Malmström and Johansson, 2016) and social exchange theory as one of the most influential conceptual paradigms for understanding workplace behaviour (Cropanzano and Mitchell, 2005) was applied in the paper together with the knowledge-based theory of the firm. After all, social exchange theory explains why individuals are prepared to collaborate and is hence also useful for explaining business-IT partnerships.…”

A Smart specialization strategy for sustainable development of regions

“…-development of the domestic law of international organizations; -assistance in integration and technology transfer; -involving intermediary organizations and partners in the innovation market (technology transfer centers, business innovation centers, development agencies, etc.) [16,17];…”

Strengthening graduate employee commitment through internal marketing in the South African retail banking industry

“…people and/or organisations) something of value has to be provided and something of value has to be returned. Therefore, the exchange secures outcomes for all parties involved that is founded on mutually rewarding transactions (Malmström and Johansson, 2016). Considering this, Lioukas and Reuer (2015) argue that the theory of social exchange is founded on the reciprocity belief.…”