Comments for Identify the sources of innovations: beyond R&D CORTÉS Jaime DEFAUW Sébastien, NZEMBELA Tshilenge BOUGRIA Oussama 13 December 2019 Coyne, K. P., Clifford, P. G., & Dye, R. (2007). Breakthrough thinking from inside the box. Harvard Business Review, 85(12), 70-8. Nowadays, we know that innovation is often in the center of a lot on conversation in companies. This article threats this topic and opens a new way of how to get innovative ideas. The first key insight is to think inside a box, because people are living with constraints all the time and specially managers. So, the idea here is…Read moreNowadays, we know that innovation is often in the center of a lot on conversation in companies. This article threats this topic and opens a new way of how to get innovative ideas. The first key insight is to think inside a box, because people are living with constraints all the time and specially managers. So, the idea here is to give a box and ask them to think inside it. In fact, having some constraints helps to explore all the options regarding these constraints. The second key insight is creating a new way to brainstorm. The reason most of brainstormings don’t work is because they always are designed the same way and people are not very good at unstructured and abstract brainstorming. In this article they propose to divide the big group into small ones with 4-5 persons maximum and instead of asking global questions, ask more precise questions but not too precise. It helps to get more people involved and more ideas. The last key insight is behind the organization of the process and its follow up. In fact, organizing and how to conduct the brainstorming session is really important. We can use some tools to do this such as: 21 Great Questions for Developing New products; Reverse engineering (What question would have caused me to see this opportunity before?); Logic tree: tree where the first questions are really global and deeper you go the more precise the question is. Finally, after the brainstorming it’s always good to have a follow up. Brainstorming should be multiple steps of a process. Regarding the managerial implications, we think first that to allow people to think better within the same box, managers should be able to set the right constraints for this. Thus people will be forced to live with constraints and explore new alternatives. As stated in the text, most managers and professionals are good at thinking effectively in the same box. But we think this implies that managers should help less good people to be better. Establishing the right constraints comes with asking the right types of questions. The kind of questions that create new boxes, different from the current ones. Secondly, the manager’s involvement in the new way of brainstorming would be to try to respect the right balance between unlimited speculation and quantitative data analysis. When the manager asks the questions that create new boxes to think in, he must prevent people from getting lost in the infinity of their ideas and give them a basis to make and compare their choices and know if they are making progress. Finally, for a better organization of the process, the manager should first set the limits of acceptable ideas. The point here is to clearly establish the parameters that make an idea acceptable: the budget, level of staffing, when a payback is needed, etc. Once these parameters have been defined, the manager will be able to adapt his questions to his specific objectives and constraints. Afterward, the manager should be careful in selecting participants who are directly related to the subject being addressed. People who have a direct relationship are more eligible to give us better advice on the subject. After these preparation phases, it is important for the manager to follow up the brainstorming process correctly. He must check that everyone is fully engaged, he must concentrate all discussions on his questions that he has previously prepared and he must not rely on just one brainstorming session. These are some really interesting insights that can be helpful if they are well implemented during a R&D process. However we must recognize the limitations of these methods. First of all people tend to be reluctant to change. This is particularly true for the quiet and introverted minds that are used to sit in silence during brainstorming. They might feel unprepared and uncomfortable the first times they will find themself in situations where they can’t hide. Moreover some people are just not “made for brainstorming”, no matter how well its organized. These types of people will be more efficient by working on the topic on their own. Another problem is that some questions cannot be answered during a brainstorming session due to the lack of data and resources. As a manager you will often hear the sentence “I can’t answer now but I could if I was not stuck in this room.” Finally, the biggest problem the manager must face is to find the constraints for the box. Indeed, formulating the good question is the most important part and it will guide the results of the all session. So the organizer must think about it carefully beforehand otherwise everybody might lose precious hours in useless mind wandering. For all these reasons, brainstorming must absolutely be a multidimensional task, not limited to one single session. The manager must be well prepared and should already ask to the participant to gather data before the session, in order to be really efficient. Moreover follow up session must be scheduled to keep in touch with the evolution of the previous idea’s. Innovation is an iterative process and it might take multiple sessions to explore one single topic. FURTHER REFERENCES Cortimiglia, M. N., Ghezzi, A., & Frank, A. G. (2015). Business model innovation and strategy making nexus: evidence from a cross-industry mixed-methods study. R&D Management, 46(3), 414–432. DOI:10.1111/radm.12113 Shows the relation of business model, business model innovation and the strategy-making process, and how this mixed-methods could indeed represent a viable methodological approach to address future research opportunities in this field. Therefore, managers may also use BM as a strategy tool to summarize and articulate the strategic internal analysis before they have effectively defined strategic alternatives to be followed and implemented. Ben Shneiderman (2016), The New ABCs of Research: Achieving Breakthrough Collaborations, Oxford University Press. Shows the combination between the ABC method (Applied and Basic Combinated) with the SED method (Science, Engineering and Design blending) to reach a better definition of the problem and possible solutions. Remarking that teamwork is the key theme. Also, to achieve breakthrough collaboration is necessary to “Accept bigger challenges” – get out of the box – and also “Ask better questions” – method discussed in the main article. Show less Reply Marc Bricheux, Margaux Ghiandoni, Alexia Henckes, Michael Mouton, Emma Trentels 10 December 2019 (Article) Laursen, K. (2012). Keep searching and you’ll find: what do we know about variety creation through firms’ search activities for innovation?. Industrial and Corporate Change, 21(5), 1181-1220 Firstly, a key point of the paper is the importance of having a balance between local and non-local search. To avoid the local search trap, managers can employ people with varied backgrounds. However, educational variety may incur costs. Moreover, if the individuals do not possess the right level of shared knowledge, this can lead to uncoordinated actions, delayed decisions and…Read moreFirstly, a key point of the paper is the importance of having a balance between local and non-local search. To avoid the local search trap, managers can employ people with varied backgrounds. However, educational variety may incur costs. Moreover, if the individuals do not possess the right level of shared knowledge, this can lead to uncoordinated actions, delayed decisions and high communication costs. Then, in order to have more non-local search, interaction with organization external to the firm seems to be helpful. That’s why, companies could collaborate with universities or external suppliers in order to have a large variety of knowledge. Also, recognize lead users is important. Indeed, it is a good way to identify the new trends and have innovative idea about the products. A good way to have interactions is to create an online community to allow the lead users to share their opinions. However, having external sources of innovation is costly so, too much search can be harmful. Finally, another limit is the possible difficulty to coordinate all the external partners with the internal R&D and to align their values with the own value of the company. Secondly, another key insight is to manage technological search over boundaries. It means that companies must project themselves into the future without focusing on current technological limitations. A good way is to practice problemistic search which is when decision makers recognize that the performance is below perceived aspirations. To recognize that your product is under future expectations, it is good to use scientific theories. Thanks to these theories you can know how far products can go in theory. A limitation of this technological search is that when a company is under pressure from competitor and have to innovate in order to raise their performance, they may take some unprofitable risks that ultimately increase the decline of the company. References of other sources : (article) Dutta, Dev K; Li, Jun; Merenda, Michael. (2011). Fostering entrepreneurship: impact of specialization and diversity in education. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 163-179 TED. (2017). External innovation basics from an R&D expert. [Online Video]. 1 October 2017. Available from: https://www.ted.com/talks/michael_ringel_external_innovation_basics_from_an_r_d_expert?fbclid=IwAR2vB-O4SnrPUwMWD-SvQMNK02SJVYsluZe3AhMXYB5Zz9dIG94f-vO4f68#t-273277. [Accessed: 20 November 2019]. Show less Reply BEGHIN Xavier, NICOLAMARIA Fulvio, BRASSEUR Mathilde, BLOUARD Adrien, FANK Luca 26 November 2019 (Book) Drucker P. (1985) The Discipline of Innovation, HBR 63(3), 65-72 The Discipline of Innovation Key points: Innovation is a balance between inspiration and hard work. Its goal is to change a perspective in an economic or social situation; Rarely innovation comes from an epiphany: often there are systematic researches and analyses. The paper identifies seven types of sources utilized in this field; Innovation starts from small steps. Usually, a leading…Read moreThe Discipline of Innovation Key points: Innovation is a balance between inspiration and hard work. Its goal is to change a perspective in an economic or social situation; Rarely innovation comes from an epiphany: often there are systematic researches and analyses. The paper identifies seven types of sources utilized in this field; Innovation starts from small steps. Usually, a leading innovation will have a moderate business, or it will become significant in the long period. Implications: A great innovation comes rarely from a flash of genius and so a lot of hard work is needed to develop it. Therefore, a good project management is crucial to give a good framing to the whole project. Moreover, a big part of the most successful innovations results from a methodical analysis of the 7 mains areas of innovation opportunities. The managers should therefore closely watch these areas in order to catch the opportunities when they appear. These sources of opportunities are: Unexpected occurrences as unexpected successes or even unexpected failures are the simplest way to find an opportunity and should thus be the first to be considered. The managers could so review the problems and opportunities and analyse both of them equally. Incongruities, so incompatibilities or mismatches are also sources of opportunity. The managers could find an incongruity and then resolve the problem presented by the incongruity. Process needs can also bring opportunities. The opportunity could be to identify the weak points of a process and answer it needs. The changes in the industry or in the market are huge sources of opportunities. The company should anticipate the changes, be ready to react to them and be an actor in these changes. Looking at demographic data and changes is a source of opportunity. Indeed, changes in number of people, in age distribution, in occupation, in geographic location create innovation opportunities. Important not to neglect demographics, to watch them, to exploit them in order to identify innovation opportunities. Changes in perception : Recommended to see the glass half empty instead of half full. Having a pessimistic approach instead of an optimistic approach regarding the current societal facts (ex : health ratios,…) can help to identify opportunities. New knowledge (ex : in science, economy, etc) can be a source of opportunities. In that case, it’s necessary to carefully analyse all the various kind of knowledge needed to an innovation, and the needs and capabilities of the targeted user. The important steps are to analyse all the source, to build the innovation in order to satisfy these noticed opportunities, to go out to identify potential users, their needs & expectations. The innovation should be simple, focused on only one thing, be designed for just one purpose in order not to confuse people, clear, easy to use for the users, easy to understand its purpose. The most successful innovations are those which begin small. Limitations: For the seven areas above, some limitations exist. It must not be forgotten that the different sources of innovation often overlap. If an innovator does not take all of them into account, he may miss an opportunity. An example showed in the article was Linotype machine’s success that is more due to a demographic issue than an industrial process need. Another limitation that can also appear as a risk if it is forgotten is to stay focused. An innovation has to be simple and do only one thing. Its application must be clearly designed and aim at leadership because the success is unpredictable. Knowledge is more important than it seems to be. In fact, an innovation is rarely only born from genius. It takes work. That corresponds to the seventh source of innovation, but not only. For example, the article says that the lead time involved is about 50 years and that this figure does not tend to reduce over time. Innovators must both analyse the opportunity and then look at the market and potential users to make their innovation successful. Further references: Boudreau, K. J., & Lakhani, K. R. (2013). Using the crowd as an innovation partner. Harvard business review, 91(4), 60-9. Nidumolu, R., Prahalad, C. K., & Rangaswami, M. R. (2009). Why sustainability is now the key driver of innovation. Harvard business review, 87(9), 56-64. Chesbrough, H. (2010). Business model innovation: opportunities and barriers. Long range planning, 43(2-3), 354-363. Show less Reply Alessia Ameghino Hidalgo, Maxime Jardinet, Nathan Josse, Marie Kuyper, Calvin Walot 26 November 2019 Nambisan, S., & Sawhney, M. (2007). A buyer’s guide to the innovation bazaar. Harvard Business Review, 85(6), 109-118. The purpose of this article is to present 3 ways to acquire innovations. First, it is possible to buy raw ideas, which is very risky and time-consuming and requires a lot of research but is not very expensive. To find these kinds of ideas, you can call on an invention capitalist. Secondly, you can buy market-ready products, which are less…Read moreThe purpose of this article is to present 3 ways to acquire innovations. First, it is possible to buy raw ideas, which is very risky and time-consuming and requires a lot of research but is not very expensive. To find these kinds of ideas, you can call on an invention capitalist. Secondly, you can buy market-ready products, which are less risky, faster, more expensive and require less research than raw ideas. To find such ideas, a venture capitalist is usually used. Finally, between these two categories of innovations, we can find market-ready ideas. They have the advantage of finding a balance between the advantages and disadvantages of the other two categories. Innovation capitalists are there to help companies find these ideas. Thanks to these key insights, we have identified three managerial implications. First, consider both your industry or market profile and your company’s internal innovation profile. Then, you should not focus on only one intermediary approach. For example, if you usually use invention capitalists, you could use innovation capitalists to seek more matures ideas. Finally, you should strengthen your relationship with your Innovation Capitalist partner by giving them you guidance an direction and by selling them your innovations too. However, there are some limitations to these implications. Not every company can easily change their way to outsource innovation. Also, not every company can sell market-ready ideas. Small companies like Lime-S for example, simply do not have any. To go further, we identified three articles : Intermediation for open innovation : comparing direct versus delegated search strategies of innovation intermediaries. Frank T Piller, Dirk Lüttgens and Kathleen Diener (2019). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Piller Agile innovation: Creating value in uncertain environments. Dupont, L. (2019). https://www.cairn.info/revue-journal-of-innovation-economics-2019-1-page-1.htm The Role of the Innovation Capitalist in Open Innovation. Satish Nambisan, John Bacon and James Throckmorton (2015). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.5437/08956308X5503031 Show less Reply ABEDINAJ Alban, Bouvry Clément, CAMACHO-FERNANDES Théotim, BALGOBIN Martin, VANDE BERG Guillaume 26 November 2019 "Elkins, T., & Keller, R. (2003) ‘Leadership in research and development organizations: a literature review and conceptual framework’. Leadership Quarterly, 14, 587-606." This article provides an overview of the leadership skills needed for innovation in R&D organizations. It also provides a conceptual framework and reviews the literature on leadership in R&D organizations. The main idea is that transformational project leaders who communicate an inspiring vision and leaders who develop a quality exchange relationship with project members are associated with the success of…Read moreThis article provides an overview of the leadership skills needed for innovation in R&D organizations. It also provides a conceptual framework and reviews the literature on leadership in R&D organizations. The main idea is that transformational project leaders who communicate an inspiring vision and leaders who develop a quality exchange relationship with project members are associated with the success of the project. Moreover, the bigger the leader is, the more successful the project will be. This article also tells us that the main qualities of a leader are his ability to communicate an inspiring vision and to develop a quality leader-member relationship. Then we learn more about the nature of the R&D and technological innovation process. The latter gives us a conceptual framework to help us visualize the behaviours of leaders in R&D organizations and the relevant variables that make R&D a different environment. The R&D organization in general and the project group import scientific and technological information (STI) and transform it into technological innovations in the form of ideas/products/processes. Subsequently, 3 categories of research that examine leadership in an R&D context are identified in this article. Firstly, direct studies of leadership theories/behaviours. Secondly, characteristics of the organizational climate that can be attributed to the leader. Thirdly, informal organization composed of roles assumed by managers. It is also important to know that in research and development organizations, there is a problem for project managers who are generally selected for both their technical expertise and leadership skills. Indeed, a number of leadership roles are essential to innovation in the context of R&D. Such as generation of ideas for the development of new ideas and creative problem solving, championship that focuses on obtaining resources and selling ideas to those outside the project group, project leading, coaching or gatekeeping (the idea of involving activities inside and outside the project team). In addition, four roles played by the leaders of successful R&D teams have been identified and managers should focus on them. The leader must be a good communicator (1), air conditioner (2), planner (3) and interfacer (4). Furthermore, in RD organization, innovation is positively related to leaders’ technical skills, negatively related to administrative skills, and not related anymore to human relations skills. Human relation skills is primordial to be successful in a project and to keep the innovation, so leader must take into account the human relations aspect. Finally, leader should also be a climate setter and set an innovative climate. After examining the role of leaders in the team, we find that we lack information about the role of the leader outside the team. Then, an outstanding issue in our article concerns transformational leadership. The article asks us if the leader’s transformational willingness has an impact on the project in the context of research and development. Another limitation of this article would be the narrowness of the subject. In fact, this article attempts to make the link between leadership and effectiveness and to notice a positive or negative relationship but never tries to find out if other factors could cause the relationship. Further references : The Influence of Leadership on Innovation Processes and Activities ADEGOKE OKENATASHA MUNSHIFRED O. WALUMBWA (Article – 2009) Research on the Impacts of Humble Leadership on R&D Team Innovation Performance based on the Social Information Processing Perspective – YashuDuan (Article – 2019) 5 ways to lead in an era of constant change Jim Hemerling- TEDxBCGParis (Vidéo – 2016) Show less Reply ADANT Aurore, CALCUS Sophie, CLOQUET Nelson, VANDEN HERREWEGEN Géraldine, VIDREQUIN Charles 29 November 2018 Acs, Z. et al (2009) The knowledge spill over theory of entrepreneurship. The aim of the article is, in addition to make a clear link between knowledge spillovers and entrepreneurial activities, to establish how those new opportunities are exploited. The theory is based on individual agent with new knowledge endowments. It’s said that those agents pursue the exploitation of such knowledge which spills over and creates a strong link between knowledge spillover…Read moreThe aim of the article is, in addition to make a clear link between knowledge spillovers and entrepreneurial activities, to establish how those new opportunities are exploited. The theory is based on individual agent with new knowledge endowments. It’s said that those agents pursue the exploitation of such knowledge which spills over and creates a strong link between knowledge spillover and entrepreneurial activities. The first insight of the article is that universities are the largest invention of mankind for knowledge spillover. Even if in the past, the role of university knowledge sharing was neglected, it has been demonstrated that universities have a huge role in developing regions by sharing their knowledge. In order to transform knowledge into economic knowledge there must be a local proximity to this source of knowledge, a set of skills and insights is not enough. As a result, the economic activities of a country are influenced by spatial units such as the geographic proximity and the regions. Secondly, tacit knowledge is bound to the individual as the source of knowledge. Indeed, there are two kinds of knowledge: codified knowledge which is easy to transmit over long distances (for example books, patents, academic articles, etc) and tacit knowledge which is bound to the individual (for example, experience, insights, individual learning, etc). Tacit knowledge is useful because it allows to grab the spillover benefits that you can get from an informal conversation. In order to do so, you must have a geographic proximity to the spillover source. And finally, entrepreneurial activities are greater in spatial context if the investments in new knowledge are high. Some insights of the article are focused on the context in which entrepreneurial activities will tend to happen. That implicates that new entrepreneurs have to be looking for knowledge. Therefore, they have to be in a context in which investments in knowledge are high and where they have access to it, for example within range of universities. Furthermore, an entrepreneur should develop its absorptive capability that is his ability to understand new knowledge, recognize its value and commercialize it by creating a firm. Finally, as tacit knowledge represents value to managers, they should develop it by investing in research and development. More especially, they should invest in developing both R&D and entrepreneurial skills through investment in talent attraction or employee’s training. While keeping those implications in mind, managers should pay attention to the fact that excessive investment in R&D can have the negative effect to strengthen companies with a dominant position. Indeed, intellectual property rights regulation is a balance between the patent owner and the society. The first wants to extend the duration to enjoy a longer monopoly profit while the society wants to make a cumulative effect out of the knowledge produced. Further references: • For a comparison of the proficiency of new and incumbent firms: Acs, Z., Plummer, L., Sutter, R., 2009b. Penetrating the knowledge filter in “rust belt” economies. The Annals of Regional Science 43 (4), 989–1012 • For more insights on how commercialization efficiency of incumbent firms affects entrepreneur’s incentives to exploit opportunities: Plummer, Lawrence A. and Acs, Zoltan J. (2014) Localized competition in the knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 29 (1). pp. 121-136. • Kirzner on Entrepreneurship : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7QG6bnsVXA • Are Entrepreneurs Modern Day Heroes? : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChEImWVj_kY Show less Reply Claire Jonet 29 November 2018 (Article) Zhou, K. Z., Yim, C. K., & Tse, D. K. (2005). The effects of strategic orientations on technology-and market-based breakthrough innovations. Journal of Marketing, 69(2), 42-60. Executive summary The article The Effects of Strategic Orientations on Technology- and Market-Based Breakthrough Innovations provides and explains the existing links between strategic orientation and the kind of breakthrough innovation. It distinguishes the incremental innovations which slightly improve the performance of the product and breakthrough innovations which are novel, unique or state-of-the-art technological…Read moreExecutive summary The article The Effects of Strategic Orientations on Technology- and Market-Based Breakthrough Innovations provides and explains the existing links between strategic orientation and the kind of breakthrough innovation. It distinguishes the incremental innovations which slightly improve the performance of the product and breakthrough innovations which are novel, unique or state-of-the-art technological advances. The last kind can be divided in two categories: tech-based innovations which are strong improvements of a product due to advanced technologies and market-based innovations which bring new criteria to products that are built for new customers and new markets. Moreover, the article allows to distinguish three strategic orientations that can generate competitive advantages: market orientation, technology orientation and entrepreneurial orientation. The first one is particularly a customer-oriented approach which aim to create customer value. It is committed to understand the latent and expressed needs of customers. The second one promotes state-of-the-art technologies and revolutionary innovations. Finally, the entrepreneurial orientation is based on the proactivity, the tolerance of risk and the reception to innovations. According to these key insights coming from the paper, several managerial implications have been relieved in order to promote an efficient management of innovations. Developing the organizational learning process, which includes information acquisition, information dissemination, shared interpretation and organizational memory, seems to be a relevant step in the elaboration of breakthrough innovations. Therefore, firms should develop and encourage it. Depending on the subject, some strategic orientations are more appropriate. Members of project team have to be flexible about these strategies. They must be able to know in which cases what strategy should be applied and the firm has to contribute at this flexibility. More specifically, at the different strategic orientations, implications, as putting in place effective systems to generate data about latent and expressed needs of customers, have been also identified. Or again, encouraging employees to share and develop “crazy ideas” via allocation of working time to develop personal project, might be an efficient implication. In some cases, the theory learned could not bring the expected results. Three limitations have been identified on the concerned topic. Firstly, the competitiveness could slow the innovation. To remain viable in a competitive environment, reducing costs remains a good solution but not suitable with the technology orientation. Moreover, some troubles could appear when we focus on a specific strategy because firms tend to have a restricted vision. They should have a large and complete view on this strategy and take into consideration all factors including those that could negatively influence their business. Lastly, the concerned strategic orientations are easier applied in B2C than in B2B. In fact, while private consumers could easily change their habits, firms have more precise and less variable expectations. Further references: Karakaya, A., & Gürel, S. (2015). STRATEGIC ORIENTATION IN BUSINESS: A RESEARCH ON KARDEMIR CO. INC./ISLETMELERDE STRATEJIK YÖNELIM: KARDEMIR A.S. ÜZERINE BIR ARASTIRMA. International Journal of Management Economics & Business, 11(26), 97-113 Martinette, L. A., & Obenchain-Leeson, A. (2012). The relationship between learning orientation and business performance and the moderating effect of competitive advantage: A service organization perspective. Journal of Service Science (Online), 5(1), 43 Show less Reply GELDERS Alice, DINIS FERNANDES João, LEDENT Louise, VAN DAMME Loïc 26 April 2018 Kedia, B. L., & Bhagat, R. S. (1988). Cultural constraints on transfer of technology across nations: Implications for research in international and comparative management. The authors aim to assess the impact of cultural differences on the effectiveness of technological transfers through a model that takes into account the characteristics of the technology Involved, differences in organizational cultures, societal culture-based differences and the absorptive capacity of the recipient organization. By characteristics, the model assesses whether the technology involved is product-, process- or person-embodied. Secondly, differences in…Read moreThe authors aim to assess the impact of cultural differences on the effectiveness of technological transfers through a model that takes into account the characteristics of the technology Involved, differences in organizational cultures, societal culture-based differences and the absorptive capacity of the recipient organization. By characteristics, the model assesses whether the technology involved is product-, process- or person-embodied. Secondly, differences in the way negotiations are conducted are used to measure differences in organizational cultures between the transitioning organizations. For this, the authors make use of the works developed by Fine (1984), Strauss (1982), and Strauss, Schatzman, Ehrlich, Bucher, & Sabshin (1963) on Negotiated Orders. These two points are referred to as casual antecedents. Societal culture-based differences are mapped under the framework of Hofstede’s (1980) uncertainty avoidance, individualism vs. collectivism, power distance, and masculinity vs. femininity, and Glenn and Glenn’s (1981) Abstractive vs. associative. Finally, the absorptive capacity of the recipient is measured by the local VS cosmopolitan mapping, how sophisticated is a firm’s technical core and the same firm’s strategic management. These last two points are indicated as influences that will presumably moderate the effectiveness of a transfer. We found that this article’s findings imply: 1) Differences in business cultures: Transfer of technology is more effective if there is a flow of skills between the supplying and the receiving company. Managers must accept that each party takes cultural values with it. The project should be clear to everyone and roles and responsibilities for both companies should be defined. Limitation: From the organizational culture point of view, not all firms are compatible. Even with the utmost caution, the transfer of technology may still fail. Managers must know when to stop to avoid a costly failure. 2) M&As: Global managers that find competition in geographies that are less compatible to effectively export a technology could acquire firms that are well positioned in those markets to attenuate crucial points of divergence. Limitation: Higher administrative burden; Potential credit issues; Potential brand damages. 3) Firm’s collaboration with locals: Managers should understand that the cultures with higher risk of ineffective technology adoption and diffusion do not foster innovation, creativity, variety or diversity. To export to these countries, they should collaborate with local firms, institutions and authorities who can better convince its people to accept newness than a foreign entity. Limitation: Having to collaborate and eventually share technology with local firms in new countries that do not deviate from established norms and may have poor legal and political regulation, increases the risk of technology theft. When China (highly centralized country) opened the doors to international trade in the 1980’s, many firms saw the risk of technology expropriation and nationalization of local branches to be too high to move to that market. References: Cagnol, R. (2013). The differences between work cultures found in eleven countries. Deskmag. [online] Available at: http://www.deskmag.com/en/steelcase-maps-work-cultures-among-11-countries [Accessed 29 Nov. 2017]. Daft, R., Kendrick, M. and Vershinina, N. (2010). Management. Andover, Hampshire: Cengage Learning EMEA, p.803. Gaba, V., Pan, Y. and Ungson, G. (2002). Timing of Entry in International Market: An Empirical Study of U.S. Fortune 500 Firms in China. Journal of International Business Studies, 33(1), pp.39-55. Kedia, B. L., & Bhagat, R. S. (1988). Cultural constraints on transfer of technology across nations: Implications for research in international and comparative management. Academy of Management Review, 13(4), 559-571. London, M., Cheney, L. A., & Tavis, R. L. (1977). The relationship between cosmopolitan–local orientation and job performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 11(2), 182-195. Nurin, T. (2016). It’s Final: AB InBev Closes On Deal To Buy SABMiller. Forbes. [online] Available at: https://www.forbes.com/sites/taranurin/2016/10/10/its-final-ab-inbev-closes-on-deal-to-buy-sabmiller/#55e891ed432c [Accessed 29 Nov. 2017]. Rubin, E. (1994). The importance of culture for the effectiveness of technology transfer across nations (Doctoral thesis). Carleton University, Ontario. New sources identified: For further and newer insights on topic of that was article presented (including firm performance): Nguyen, N. T. D., & Aoyama, A. (2014). Impact of Corporate Culture on the Relationship between Efficient Technology Transfer and Business Performance. Global Business Review, 15(4), 637-661. For a hypothesis on how to realize an efficient technology transfer (the article that was presented mentioned the factors that affect transfers but did not offer potential solutions): Nguyen, N. T. D., & Aoyama, A. (2014). Achieving efficient technology transfer through a specific corporate culture facilitated by management practices. The Journal of High Technology Management Research, 25(2), 108-122. For an analysis of the causes of failure of projects involving technology transfer: Kebede, K., Ndegwah, D. and Kroesen, J. (2013). Successful Contextual Technology Transfer and Determinants of Culture. From the book: Kauffman, J. (2013). Handbook of Sustainable Engineering: Successful Contextual Technology Transfer and Determinants of Culture. [895-919]. Netherlands: Springer Science + Business Media Dordrecht. For a report on firm diversity in recent years and the benefits of embracing it (risk posed by technology transfers to different cultures can be minimized if the firms has human capital that relates to those cultures): Hunt, V., Layton, D. & Prince, S. (2015) Diversity Matters, McKinsey and Company Show less Reply Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Reference Identify the bibliographic reference you are commenting. You may use simple HTML tags to add links or lists to your comment:<a href="url">link</a> <ul><li>list item 1</li><li>list item2</li></ul> <em>italic</em> <strong>bold</strong>Name * Email * Notify me by email when the comment gets approved.