The Risk of De-Risking Innovation: Optimal R&amp;D Strategies in Ambiguous Environments

Drakeman, Donald L.; Oraiopoulos, Nektarios

doi:10.1177/0008125620915289

Cited by 11 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The authors of our article are similar to Drakeman and Oraiopoulos (2020) in their conclusions that the current conditions of the world economy are a "zone of uncertainty", especially when implementing an innovative project.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…In the article by Drakeman and Oraiopoulos (2020), the authors consider the influence of uncertainty conditions on risk assessment methods.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…An additional proof of the presence of indirect nonstandard risks associated with an unstable external environment is the statement about the high rate of change in the business environment, mentioned in Hock-Doepgen et al (2021). In addition, the research results presented in the publications of Babenko et al (2018), Rutkowska-Ziarko and Markowski (2020), Gutsalenko and Marchuk (2020), Yau-Yeung et al (2020), Domnin and Martynenko (2019), Drakeman and Oraiopoulos (2020) and Hartwig and Mathews (2020) are analyzed below.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Analytical Methods to Assess Financial Capacity in Face of Innovation Projects Risks

Rogulenko

Orlov

Smolyakov

et al. 2021

Risks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to analyze the most relevant methods to determine the financial capacity of innovation projects and identify potential ways of their improvement. The research helped to propose an alternative methodology to assess the financial capacity of innovation projects by charting an alternative balance with a minimum scope of data (annual balance sheet data, project term). The authors drew a conclusion concerning the critical role of choices on the methods applied to analyze the financial capacity of innovation projects in the context of different scales and terms of project jobs in an analyzed project and the need for the proposed alternative (estimate or expertise-based) assessment of financial capacity as well as the relevant risks associated with the implementation of the new financial capacity assessment system and the overall risks of the innovation project. These specifically concern the choices of the methods of attribution of indirect costs in innovation projects, composition and scope of criteria to distinguish business processes to manage these processes and constituent operations, the form of a matrix of correspondence for a set of costs by the stages of an innovation project (event-based matrix accounting) and the information model of the objective-based methods of managing an innovation project as an object.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…In the article by Drakeman and Oraiopoulos (2020), the authors consider the influence of uncertainty conditions on risk assessment methods.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Analytical Methods to Assess Financial Capacity in Face of Innovation Projects Risks

Rogulenko

Orlov

Smolyakov

et al. 2021

Risks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Anticipatory systems offer hypotheses that are not necessarily true but are an embodiment of an envisioned future state in relation to the premises (see Poli, 2019aPoli, , 2019b. Such reasoning has further implications for risk mitigation as the decision propels a potential spread of the first investment across multiple possible applications and added value propositions (see Drakeman & Oraiopoulos, 2020;Floricel & Ibanescu, 2008;Nagji & Tuff, 2012). This infers being anticipatory and proactive in hypothesizing different futures or operating contexts in which contingent opportunities can be generated (see Reeves et al, 2016Reeves et al, , 2021.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Innovation System Roadmap: A novel approach to instil futures‐oriented reasoning in strategic decision making

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Society is in constant flux and increasing in complexity, challenging organizations to approach innovation in a more proactive manner. This entails anticipating, rather than reacting to what could be next by preparing for a variety of possible futures. Specifically, it means exploring the future value of an idea rather than analysing it as is. In the context of the fuzzy front end of a new product development, scholars highlight the efficacy of using anticipatory systems and the underlying futures‐oriented reasoning to make more accurate decision making (i.e., futures thinking, abductive reasoning and contingency mapping). Yet how to systematically stimulate such reasoning in practice is still understudied. The paper presents findings from semistructured interviews with expert innovation managers, which show that futures thinking approaches do feature in strategic decision making on innovation ideas. Yet they are limited in their use and in most cases outweighed by more classical, deductive reasoning patterns. The paper proposes the Innovation System Roadmap (ISR) for innovation managers making strategic decisions on early‐stage ideas. It leads users to employ the cognitive processes underlying anticipatory systems. The Innovation System Roadmap stimulates innovation managers to hypothesize the future value of a given innovation idea and how it may (not) be turned into a commercial success following further development. We contend that the Innovation System Roadmap supports innovation managers for sound decision making in early‐stage innovation under extreme uncertainties.

show abstract

“…Innovation is at the top of the corporate agenda (Subramaniam and Youndt, 2005; Fu, 2015; Andersén and Ljungkvist, 2021) but failure rates are worryingly high in NPD (Nakata and Hwang, 2020). Managers understand that organizations that fail to innovate will simply become obsolete (Drakeman and Oraiopoulos, 2020). Some estimates suggest that as few as 10% of .new products introduced are successful (Castellion and Markham, 2013).…”

Section: Theoretical Background and Hypotheses Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Blind faith or hard evidence? Exploring the indirect performance impact of design thinking practices in R&D

Robbins

2022

R & D Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Design thinking has recently been the subject of considerable attention from academics and practitioners. In management discourse, design thinking is a creative and human‐centred problem‐solving approach based on designers’ practices, used mainly in the pursuit of product, service and process innovation. Despite being increasingly promoted and adopted as an approach to innovation, we know little about whether and how design thinking influences firm performance. Drawing upon the resource‐based view of the firm and dynamic capability theory, this paper answers these questions via a two‐study approach in the context of R&D. Study 1 explores the perceived performance impact of design thinking in a descriptive way. Study 2 investigates the mediating role of organizational innovative capability in design thinking and organizational innovative performance relationship. The results from these two studies shed light on design thinking’s performance impact. In addition, they add evidentiary support to the contention that design‐thinking practices applied in R&D help develop organizational innovative capability, which in turn increases organizational innovative performance. This research adds welcome evidentiary support to the contention that design thinking practices, applied in R&D, help develop organizational innovative capability, which in turn increases organizational innovative performance. Our study offers a theory‐based and actionable approach which explains the underlying mechanism through which a firm can boost its innovation performance by the adoption of design thinking.

show abstract

The Risk of De-Risking Innovation: Optimal R&D Strategies in Ambiguous Environments

Cited by 11 publications

References 10 publications

Analytical Methods to Assess Financial Capacity in Face of Innovation Projects Risks

Analytical Methods to Assess Financial Capacity in Face of Innovation Projects Risks

The Innovation System Roadmap: A novel approach to instil futures‐oriented reasoning in strategic decision making

Blind faith or hard evidence? Exploring the indirect performance impact of design thinking practices in R&D

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About