《电子商务 E-business》阅读文献_Leveraging e-R D processesa knowledge-based view

technovation ELSEVIER Technovation 23(2003)905-915 www.elseviercom/locate/technovation Leveraging e-R&D processes: a knowledge-based view Eric h. Kessler Pace University. I Pace Plaza, New York. NY 10038-1598. USA Abstract This is particularly true with regard to applying the technology to the conduct of industrial research and new product development processes, or e-R&D. Notwithstanding, there is scant scientific research to assess how R&d teams are leveraging the Internet in their innovation activities, if their efforts are efficient and effective, and how they could do better. This paper considers the following interrelated research questions: (1)How can Internet-leveraged networks contribute to R&d project management, (2) Where are these networks applied in the r&d process, and (3)What are the likely manifestations of such networks? It develops a framework for understanding and testing these issues, based on a knowledge-based view of the firm, to examine internal, external, and memory related knowledge flows. Then, a three-dimensional template of e-R&D networks is developed that over gr and direction flows, based on Internet attributes, R&d process stages, and major R&D outcomes. Research hypotheses are offered, and directions for future inquiries are discussed. C 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved Keywords: R&D; Innovation; Internet 1. Introduction trial research and development processes(Alsene, 1999, Burn and Barnett, 1999, Van den End and Wijnbeg There is much emphasis these days on building effec- 2001). The growing impact of Internet networking tools tive networks, which is well justified given the impor- on R&d is manifest in its transformation of the pro- tance and pervasiveness of network analysis in under- cesses by which organizational actors acquire technical standing management and organizations. From knowledge, develop new products and services, and con- population ecology to sociometric analysis, network con- nect with users. In short, the Internet affects R&D-ori- cepts and modeling approaches have helped us under- ented organizations and groups by changing "the way stand related phenomena at the population, inter-organi- minds work together"(Hafner, 2001) (Scott, 1992). This paper focuses on the Internet, defined businesses now use cyberspace for everything from fin- as the worlds largest information network that connects ance to product development and virtual prototyping computers and the regional and the local networks that Penetration in corporate research has become even connect these computers(Leshin, 1997). The Internet greater, as almost 80% of engineers now use the Internet provides networking-related tools that can be used by for gathering procurement information and almost 95% intra- and inter-organizational groups engaged in the of researchers have started using the Internet in some research and development(R&D) process form or another to improve their design and development The Internet profoundly influences people's personal work. Combined, these observations suggest that cyber- lives and a growing number of organizational functions. innovation processes, or" e-R&D"'(c f, rolandber It affects technology strategy and the conduct of indus- ger. com, 2001), has emerged as a cutting-edge area of application and investigation. Thus, it certainly warrants the attention of academics, consultants, and corporate Corresponding author. Tel: +1-212-346-1885: fax: +1-212.346. professionals in the technology and innovation manage E-mail address: kessler(@pace. edu(EH. Kessler) notwithstanding, there has been comparatively little 0166-4972/S- see front matter 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved doi:10.10160166-4972(03)00108-1

Technovation 23 (2003) 905–915 www.elsevier.com/locate/technovation Leveraging e-R&D processes: a knowledge-based view Eric H. Kessler ∗ Lubin School of Business, Pace University, 1 Pace Plaza, New York, NY 10038-1598, USA Abstract There is a growing application of Internet-driven networking tools to improve organizations and teams’ value-creating activities. This is particularly true with regard to applying the technology to the conduct of industrial research and new product development processes, or e-R&D. Notwithstanding, there is scant scientific research to assess how R&D teams are leveraging the Internet in their innovation activities, if their efforts are efficient and effective, and how they could do better. This paper considers the following interrelated research questions: (1) How can Internet-leveraged networks contribute to R&D project management, (2) Where are these networks applied in the R&D process, and (3) What are the likely manifestations of such networks? It develops a framework for understanding and testing these issues, based on a knowledge-based view of the firm, to examine internal, external, and memory￾related knowledge flows. Then, a three-dimensional template of e-R&D networks is developed that overlays each of these three flows, based on Internet attributes, R&D process stages, and major R&D outcomes. Research hypotheses are offered, and directions for future inquiries are discussed.  2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: R&D; Innovation; Internet 1. Introduction There is much emphasis these days on building effec￾tive networks, which is well justified given the impor￾tance and pervasiveness of network analysis in under￾standing management and organizations. From population ecology to sociometric analysis, network con￾cepts and modeling approaches have helped us under￾stand related phenomena at the population, inter-organi￾zational, intra-organizational, and interpersonal levels (Scott, 1992). This paper focuses on the Internet, defined as the world’s largest information network that connects computers and the regional and the local networks that connect these computers (Leshin, 1997). The Internet provides networking-related tools that can be used by intra- and inter-organizational groups engaged in the research and development (R&D) process. The Internet profoundly influences people’s personal lives and a growing number of organizational functions. It affects technology strategy and the conduct of indus- ∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-212-346-1885; fax: +1-212-346- 1573. E-mail address: ekessler@pace.edu (E.H. Kessler). 0166-4972/$ - see front matter  2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/S0166-4972(03)00108-1 trial research and development processes (Alsene, 1999, Burn and Barnett, 1999; Van den End and Wijnbeg, 2001). The growing impact of Internet networking tools on R&D is manifest in its transformation of the pro￾cesses by which organizational actors acquire technical knowledge, develop new products and services, and con￾nect with users. In short, the Internet affects R&D-ori￾ented organizations and groups by changing “the way minds work together” (Hafner, 2001). Consider the following trends: More than one-third of businesses now use cyberspace for everything from fin￾ance to product development and virtual prototyping. Penetration in corporate research has become even greater, as almost 80% of engineers now use the Internet for gathering procurement information and almost 95% of researchers have started using the Internet in some form or another to improve their design and development work. Combined, these observations suggest that cyber￾innovation processes, or “e-R&D” (c.f., rolandber￾ger.com, 2001), has emerged as a cutting-edge area of application and investigation. Thus, it certainly warrants the attention of academics, consultants, and corporate professionals in the technology and innovation manage￾ment field. Notwithstanding, there has been comparatively little

E.H. Kessler/Technovation 23(2003)905-915 conceptual modeling, especially with regard to big-pic- the Internets potential is not equaled by its current state ture relationships, and systematic, empirical investi- of leverage within and between organizations to create gation into the optimization of these tools across the networked processes innovation process. That is, although there is a general With regard to upstream utilication of the Internet in acknowledgement in the literature that Internet-enabled an e-R&d process, Barua et al. (1997) developed an ana- networks are a potentially valuable tool to facilitate r& lytical model that offers buyers a maximized payoff from D activities, there are few specific, empirical studies that the selection process by using the Internet for procure- systematically investigate this assertion. Instead, most ment. Mitchell(2000)and Finch(1999)propose ways research-related articles in this field are derived of idio- that the Internet can help corporations capture the crea- tions. Moreover, these articles are largely disconnected specifically, Plymale and Hartgrove(1999)elaborate on from each other. They appear in a wide variety of litera- two areas "ripe for evolution on the Web", online com- ture and seldom cross-reference or build from each parison of components and design-in capabilities in others specialized focus. Indeed, it is fair to say that the component selection. Indeed, Studt's(1999) survey of literature is somewhat embryonic and fragmented industrial researchers reveals that, currently, the To provide an overall picture of the general state of maximum use of the Internet was finding technical infor the related literature, we adapt and apply Deise et al.'s mation followed by finding new product information and (2000)typology, of e-business channel enhancements then sourcing and purchasing information. Hefner(2001) as the Internet. Through this lens, one can conceptualize process for a new wireless headset for its minivan, which e-R&D input(or upstream)enhancements, conversion used the internet to coordinate the half-dozen contractors (or business process)enhancements, and downstream(or in virtual meetings selling and service)enhancements In terms of general considerations of e-R&D net With regard to process management via the Internet in an e-R&D process, Deitz(1997) ponders ways to re- working tools, Andrews(1999)argues that the Internet architecture design tools such as CAD, CAM, and CAE impacts R&D primarily by altering not the end products to smoothly interface with the Internet. lansiti and but the overall R&D process. Andrews proposition is consistent with the tone of this manuscript, where I focus consider whether the Internet can be used to create a not on e-products but on e-R&D. Similarly, Antonelli et al. (2000)argue that the Internet is a critical medium for more effective development process for new products linking the development of information and new knowl- To this end, Richir et al. (2001)describe a digital edge with its application. They contend that the Internet eering design process that allows quicker innovation in a more creative way and favors direct commercialization can be used to change the process of the accumulating of industrial products that may be kept virtual throughout new knowledge and affect the pace and direction of sub- sequent technological convergence upon which the evol the design process. They argue that this type of process ution of information and communication technologies also offers the potential for design as well as marketing rests.Ghosh(1998)adds that the Internet presents differ- of these industrial products. For example, Sawhney and ent types of opportunities for established businesses, one Prandelli (2000)show how the Internet can enable"com- being its use to develop and deliver new products and munities of creation", or virtual shared spaces for hosting services for new customers. He discusses potential ways relationships and facilitating knowledge generation and for a company to do this: Use it for direct access to sharing. Subsequent to design, Dahan and Srinivasan uct concept test- serve new customer segments (new niches), and to con- ing method that incorporates virtual prototypes of new duct transactions over it(e-commerce). Sweeney (1999) product concepts. These authors elaborate on the poss- reports on several firms that are"leveraging Internet ible ways of applying the Internet to facilitate a low-cost technology to streamline product development, manage parallel testing procedure that produced market shares teams of workers in geographically dispersed locations, closely mirroring those obtained with the physical pro- and reduce time to complete projects". Nevertheless, he ducts concludes " the average company still lags well behind In a slightly different yet complementary angle, Gupta these trailblazers. This is important, for Miller(2001) (1997) considers the possibilities of using Intranets and ightly observes that the Internet will be a critical Internets to facilitate internal communication. To this omponent in fourth generation(4G) technology man- point, Hameri and Nihtila(1997)observe that the Inter agement;alas, most firms are still practicing outmoded net and World Wide Web(www) can be effectively forms of technology management. Also, McGrath(2001) used to manage and disseminate project information claims that the networked economy is changing all the throughout an organization. Similarly, Hibbard and Car rules in innovation. All in all, the consensus appears that rillo (1998)discuss the potential for leveraging the Inter

906 E.H. Kessler / Technovation 23 (2003) 905–915 conceptual modeling, especially with regard to big-pic￾ture relationships, and systematic, empirical investi￾gation into the optimization of these tools across the innovation process. That is, although there is a general acknowledgement in the literature that Internet-enabled networks are a potentially valuable tool to facilitate R& D activities, there are few specific, empirical studies that systematically investigate this assertion. Instead, most research-related articles in this field are derived of idio￾syncratic observations and small-sample case descrip￾tions. Moreover, these articles are largely disconnected from each other. They appear in a wide variety of litera￾ture and seldom cross-reference or build from each other’s specialized focus. Indeed, it is fair to say that the literature is somewhat embryonic and fragmented. To provide an overall picture of the general state of the related literature, we adapt and apply Deise et al.’s (2000) typology of e-business channel enhancements that result from leveraging information technology such as the Internet. Through this lens, one can conceptualize e-R&D input (or upstream) enhancements, conversion (or business process) enhancements, and downstream (or selling and service) enhancements. In terms of general considerations of e-R&D net￾working tools, Andrews (1999) argues that the Internet impacts R&D primarily by altering not the end products but the overall R&D process. Andrew’s proposition is consistent with the tone of this manuscript, where I focus not on e-products but on e-R&D. Similarly, Antonelli et al. (2000) argue that the Internet is a critical medium for linking the development of information and new knowl￾edge with its application. They contend that the Internet can be used to change the process of the accumulating new knowledge and affect the pace and direction of sub￾sequent technological convergence upon which the evol￾ution of information and communication technologies rests. Ghosh (1998) adds that the Internet presents differ￾ent types of opportunities for established businesses, one being its use to develop and deliver new products and services for new customers. He discusses potential ways for a company to do this: Use it for direct access to customers (marketing), to mine its own digital assets to serve new customer segments (new niches), and to con￾duct transactions over it (e-commerce). Sweeney (1999) reports on several firms that are “leveraging Internet technology to streamline product development, manage teams of workers in geographically dispersed locations, and reduce time to complete projects”. Nevertheless, he concludes “the average company still lags well behind” these trailblazers. This is important, for Miller (2001) rightly observes that the Internet will be a critical component in fourth generation (4G) technology man￾agement; alas, most firms are still practicing outmoded forms of technology management. Also, McGrath (2001) claims that the networked economy is changing all the rules in innovation. All in all, the consensus appears that the Internet’s potential is not equaled by its current state of leverage within and between organizations to create networked processes. With regard to upstream utilization of the Internet in an e-R&D process, Barua et al. (1997) developed an ana￾lytical model that offers buyers a maximized payoff from the selection process by using the Internet for procure￾ment. Mitchell (2000) and Finch (1999) propose ways that the Internet can help corporations capture the crea￾tivity and insight of consumers and suppliers. More specifically, Plymale and Hartgrove (1999) elaborate on two areas “ripe for evolution on the Web”, online com￾parison of components and design-in capabilities in component selection. Indeed, Studt’s (1999) survey of industrial researchers reveals that, currently, the maximum use of the Internet was finding technical infor￾mation followed by finding new product information and then sourcing and purchasing information. Hefner (2001) illustrates this by describing Chrysler’s development process for a new wireless headset for its minivan, which used the Internet to coordinate the half-dozen contractors in virtual meetings. With regard to process management via the Internet in an e-R&D process, Deitz (1997) ponders ways to re￾architecture design tools such as CAD, CAM, and CAE to smoothly interface with the Internet. Iansiti and McCormack (1997) and Gardiner and Ritchie (1999) consider whether the Internet can be used to create a more effective development process for new products. To this end, Richir et al. (2001) describe a digital engin￾eering design process that allows quicker innovation in a more creative way and favors direct commercialization of industrial products that may be kept virtual throughout the design process. They argue that this type of process also offers the potential for design as well as marketing of these industrial products. For example, Sawhney and Prandelli (2000) show how the Internet can enable “com￾munities of creation”, or virtual shared spaces for hosting relationships and facilitating knowledge generation and sharing. Subsequent to design, Dahan and Srinivasan (2000) describe an Internet-based product concept test￾ing method that incorporates virtual prototypes of new product concepts. These authors elaborate on the poss￾ible ways of applying the Internet to facilitate a low-cost, parallel testing procedure that produced market shares closely mirroring those obtained with the physical pro￾ducts. In a slightly different yet complementary angle, Gupta (1997) considers the possibilities of using Intranets and Internets to facilitate internal communication. To this point, Hameri and Nihtila (1997) observe that the Inter￾net and World Wide Web (WWW) can be effectively used to manage and disseminate project information throughout an organization. Similarly, Hibbard and Car￾rillo (1998) discuss the potential for leveraging the Inter-

E.H. Kessler/Technovation 23(2003)905-915 net to facilitate knowledge management strategies in structures also contributes the knowledge applied to a project(Burgelman and Rosenbloom, 1989; Prahalad With regard to downstream application of the Internet and Hamel, 1990). How well an organizations teams in an e-R&D process, Corbiltt(1999)offers useful manage relevant internal and external networks, as well observations about how the Internet might be best used as the cumulative and long-term manifestations of these for secure financial transactions(e.g, digital signatures networks in its organizational memory, has direct impli and firewalls). Darko(1999)describes some applications cations concerning the success of its R&d processes for developing partner-like relationships between com-(Kessler et al., 2001, 2000). These relationships are rep panies and consumers. Landry (1999)discusses the resented in Fig. 1. The subsequent sections discuss how potential in the area of Internet-based product testing, leveraging Internet-driven e-R&D networking tools can which allows companies to get customers' reactions be a valuable tool for facilitating internal, external, and quickly and cheaply. Moreover, Mathieu(2001) argues memory-related knowledge flows that, since technology transfer can be viewed largely a communication phenomenon, web-based information 2. 2. Internal learning networks systems can be used to help technology transfer Specifically, he examines manufacturing technologie The internal learning processes of an organizations related to rapid prototyping, production planning and R&d groups start with the creation of knowledge by control, performance measurement, design for manufac- individuals( Simon, 1991); e-R&D networking tools can ure, supply chain management and manufacturing give individuals access to a world of information and potential fodder for insights, ranging from general news In summary, the relevant e-R&D-related literature is webpages to a firm's project database. New ideas are largely a collection of practitioner-based observations then circulated among small networks of co-workers in and illustrative case studies, as well as a growing yet a"community-of-practice"in the sense that they share poorly connected body of more scholarly inquiries. similar perspectives and interpretation framework There is scant theory-driven research to assess how com-(Brown and Duguid, 1991; Hedberg, 1981); e-R&d net anies are leveraging the Internet, if their efforts are working tools can provide channels for idea circulation efficient and effective, and how they could do better and can standardize information distribution approaches This paper attempts to enhance the foundations for such to develop shared frameworks. Organizational learning a broad-based endeavor. It adopts a knowledge-based occurs when the knowledge is transferred to the larger view of the firm and offers a more general tone to reflect organizational network of individual specialists, inte- the relative embryonic state of the scientific research grated with other knowledge areas, and applied to a new literature as compared to actual business practices. For- product or process(Nonaka, 1994): e-R&D networking mally, it consider the following interrelated research tools can facilitate knowledge transfer and, when com- questions:(1)HOW can Internet-leveraged networks bined with database tools, help integrate knowledge into contribute to r&d project management, (2)WHERE are existing paradigms and memory. Further, e-R&D net- these networks applied in the r&d process, and (3) working tools are particularly well suited to overcome WhaT are the likely manifestations of such networks traditional barriers to internal learning networks by pro- moting values such as openness and teamwork (Starbuck, 1992), decentralized linkages and knowledge 2. Hypotheses development flows(Fiol and Lyles, 1985), and enhanced quantity and quality of communication(Damanpour, 1991) 2.1. e-R&D newworks vis-a-vis a knowledge-based Hypothesis la. Organizations that leverage e-R&D view of the firm networks in project groups'internal learning processes to a greater extent will be more successful innovators A knowledge-based view of firm activities is centered than those organizations that do so to a lesser extent around the notion that a firms success depends on how well it can(a)enhance its own knowledge base by either creating or obtaining new knowledge, (b) integrate its External learnin different knowledge areas, and(c)apply its knowledge to the development or enhancement of products or pro Internal Learning cesses(Grant, 1996, Nonaka, 1994, Kogut and Zander 92). Both internal and external knowledge flows con &D Project tribute to r&D-oriented group activity, although there Success considerable variability between projects on their rela onal Memory tive degree of contribution. In addition, inter-project learning via organizationally institutionalized memory Fig 1. General knowledge fows in a networked R&D process

E.H. Kessler / Technovation 23 (2003) 905–915 907 net to facilitate knowledge management strategies in general. With regard to downstream application of the Internet in an e-R&D process, Corbiltt (1999) offers useful observations about how the Internet might be best used for secure financial transactions (e.g., digital signatures and firewalls). Darko (1999) describes some applications for developing partner-like relationships between com￾panies and consumers. Landry (1999) discusses the potential in the area of Internet-based product testing, which allows companies to get customers’ reactions quickly and cheaply. Moreover, Mathieu (2001) argues that, since technology transfer can be viewed largely as a communication phenomenon, web-based information systems can be used to help technology transfer. Specifically, he examines manufacturing technologies related to rapid prototyping, production planning and control, performance measurement, design for manufac￾ture, supply chain management and manufacturing simulation. In summary, the relevant e-R&D-related literature is largely a collection of practitioner-based observations and illustrative case studies, as well as a growing yet poorly connected body of more scholarly inquiries. There is scant theory-driven research to assess how com￾panies are leveraging the Internet, if their efforts are efficient and effective, and how they could do better. This paper attempts to enhance the foundations for such a broad-based endeavor. It adopts a knowledge-based view of the firm and offers a more general tone to reflect the relative embryonic state of the scientific research literature as compared to actual business practices. For￾mally, it consider the following interrelated research questions: (1) HOW can Internet-leveraged networks contribute to R&D project management, (2) WHERE are these networks applied in the R&D process, and (3) WHAT are the likely manifestations of such networks. 2. Hypotheses development 2.1. e-R&D networks vis-a-vis a knowledge-based view of the firm A knowledge-based view of firm activities is centered around the notion that a firm’s success depends on how well it can (a) enhance its own knowledge base by either creating or obtaining new knowledge, (b) integrate its different knowledge areas, and (c) apply its knowledge to the development or enhancement of products or pro￾cesses (Grant, 1996; Nonaka, 1994; Kogut and Zander, 1992). Both internal and external knowledge flows con￾tribute to R&D-oriented group activity, although there is considerable variability between projects on their rela￾tive degree of contribution. In addition, inter-project learning via organizationally institutionalized memory structures also contributes the knowledge applied to a project (Burgelman and Rosenbloom, 1989; Prahalad and Hamel, 1990). How well an organization’s teams manage relevant internal and external networks, as well as the cumulative and long-term manifestations of these networks in its organizational memory, has direct impli￾cations concerning the success of its R&D processes (Kessler et al., 2001, 2000). These relationships are rep￾resented in Fig. 1. The subsequent sections discuss how leveraging Internet-driven e-R&D networking tools can be a valuable tool for facilitating internal, external, and memory-related knowledge flows. 2.2. Internal learning networks The internal learning processes of an organization’s R&D groups start with the creation of knowledge by individuals (Simon, 1991); e-R&D networking tools can give individuals access to a world of information and potential fodder for insights, ranging from general news webpages to a firm’s project database. New ideas are then circulated among small networks of co-workers in a “community-of-practice” in the sense that they share similar perspectives and interpretation frameworks (Brown and Duguid, 1991; Hedberg, 1981); e-R&D net￾working tools can provide channels for idea circulation and can standardize information distribution approaches to develop shared frameworks. Organizational learning occurs when the knowledge is transferred to the larger organizational network of individual specialists, inte￾grated with other knowledge areas, and applied to a new product or process (Nonaka, 1994); e-R&D networking tools can facilitate knowledge transfer and, when com￾bined with database tools, help integrate knowledge into existing paradigms and memory. Further, e-R&D net￾working tools are particularly well suited to overcome traditional barriers to internal learning networks by pro￾moting values such as openness and teamwork (Starbuck, 1992), decentralized linkages and knowledge flows (Fiol and Lyles, 1985), and enhanced quantity and quality of communication (Damanpour, 1991). Hypothesis 1a. Organizations that leverage e
R&D networks in project groups’ internal learning processes to a greater extent will be more successful innovators than those organizations that do so to a lesser extent. Fig. 1. General knowledge flows in a networked R&D process

E.H. Kessler/Technovation 23(2003)905-915 2.3. External learning networ tutionalized practices. e-R&d networking tools can be used to capture and store knowledge through systemized In contrast, the external learning process starts with collection and coding of tasks and projects in files and the identification of a new idea by an outside source and formal procedures and dissemination can be improved the subsequent inter-network integration of this idea into by the use of computer systems and organizational the focal organization. The new ideas may come from intranets. For example, information, expert, and prob- customer and lead user feedback(Pascale, 1984, Von lem-solution databases can be used to facilitate inter Hipple, 1988); e-R&D networking tools are a source of project learning feedback insofar as they provide advanced and real-time However, it is important to note that much R&D linkages with these parties. External ideas can also be related knowledge is tacit, or difficult to codify. There opied from competitors via the monitoring of patents, fore it must be shared, stored and retrieved by more publications, and public statements (Ghoshal and direct communications and sharing of experiences Westney, 1991; Gilad and Gilad, 1988; Bierly and Chak Nonaka, 1994). It is critical during the new product rabarti, 1996); e-R&D networking tools can help monitor development process to convert tacit knowledge stored these developments through business intelligence fea- in the organizations memory into explicit knowledge tures, such as automatic scan and manual search pro- that can be understood by individuals lacking experience cedures, that sift through and pinpoint relevant infor- in a specific area. To this end, e-R&D networking tools mation among the immense Internet-available pool of can help overcome barriers to this translation by aiding information in the storage and dissemination of information Organizations'R&D-oriented groups also learn from (Huber, 1991) others outside their industry such as university and Hypothesis lc. Organizations that leverage e-R&D government research centers(Imai et al., 1988; Mowery networks in project groups'institutionalized memory et al., 1996; Porter, 1990); e-R&D networking tools can processes to a greater extent will be more successful provide vehicles for participating in these geographically innovators than those organizations that do so to a dispersed cooperative arrangements. Additionally, e-R&d lesser extent networking tools are particularly well suited to overcome traditional barriers to external learning, such as the not- 2. 5. A 3-dimensional model of internet-driven e-R&D invented-here(NIH) syndrome(Katz and Allen, 1982), networked processes nsofar as they make the process of group members accessing outside information easier and more legitimate and increase the degree to which existing expertise can Second, I consider the nature and effects of applying be applied to understand the outside source(Cohen and the Internet to facilitate these knowledge flows via net- Levinthal, 1990) worked R&D activities-1.e, e-R&D. In a global sense Hypothesis 1b. Organizations that leverage e-R&d I apply Deise et al. s(2000)model to postulate that the networks in project groups'external learning processes Internet can(a) facilitate existing tasks in the r&d pro- to a greater extent will be more successful innovators cess(can do the same stuff faster, cheaper, better-it is than those organizations that do so to a lesser extent. an enhancement and of incremental value-and(b) the Internet fundamentally alters the r&d process(new ry and longitudinal learnin game, new rules, new criteria, new steps, tasks, and nero sequences, etc.)it is transformational and of frame- breaking value. This is consistent with research in the Over time, a firm's success in R&D is a function of innovation literature that suggests R&d projects should the cumulative development of internal and external be distinguished by their degree of radicalness, or degree learning. Therefore, the management of an organiza- of change(Damanpour, 1991; Eisenhardt and Tabrizi tion's memory, or the stored information from its history 1995: Mc Donough, 1993). Radical innovations are less that can be transferred from group to group and brought certain, involve a greater proportion of experimentation to bear on present decisions(Walsh and Ungson, 1991), and iterative problem solving, and hence require more is crucial. As individuals and groups share and integrate flexibility and learning, e-R&D networking tools can knowledge, the knowledge is stored in the organizational provide low-risk experimentation options via electronic structure, systems, routines and procedures. This contrib- mediums and broad access to sources of information and utes to the development of technological capabilities that learning. Incremental innovations are more certain can be applied across projects(Burgelman and Rosen- involve a greater proportion of planning and implemen- bloom, 1989, Prahalad and Hamel, 1990). When individ- tation, and hence require more efficiency and com- uals leave a team or organization, some of their knowl- pression; e-R&d networking tools can provide planning edge also leaves but, depending on the effectiveness of and organizational resources as well as cost-effective he organizational memory, some also remain communication and distribution and systems

908 E.H. Kessler / Technovation 23 (2003) 905–915 2.3. External learning networks In contrast, the external learning process starts with the identification of a new idea by an outside source and the subsequent inter-network integration of this idea into the focal organization. The new ideas may come from customer and lead user feedback (Pascale, 1984; Von Hipple, 1988); e-R&D networking tools are a source of feedback insofar as they provide advanced and real-time linkages with these parties. External ideas can also be copied from competitors via the monitoring of patents, publications, and public statements (Ghoshal and Westney, 1991; Gilad and Gilad, 1988; Bierly and Chak￾rabarti, 1996); e-R&D networking tools can help monitor these developments through business intelligence fea￾tures, such as automatic scan and manual search pro￾cedures, that sift through and pinpoint relevant infor￾mation among the immense Internet-available pool of information. Organizations’ R&D-oriented groups also learn from others outside their industry such as university and government research centers (Imai et al., 1988; Mowery et al., 1996; Porter, 1990); e-R&D networking tools can provide vehicles for participating in these geographically dispersed cooperative arrangements. Additionally, e-R&D networking tools are particularly well suited to overcome traditional barriers to external learning, such as the not￾invented-here (NIH) syndrome (Katz and Allen, 1982), insofar as they make the process of group members accessing outside information easier and more legitimate and increase the degree to which existing expertise can be applied to understand the outside source (Cohen and Levinthal, 1990). Hypothesis 1b. Organizations that leverage e
R&D networks in project groups’ external learning processes to a greater extent will be more successful innovators than those organizations that do so to a lesser extent. 2.4. Organizational memory and longitudinal learning networks Over time, a firm’s success in R&D is a function of the cumulative development of internal and external learning. Therefore, the management of an organiza￾tion’s memory, or the stored information from its history that can be transferred from group to group and brought to bear on present decisions (Walsh and Ungson, 1991), is crucial. As individuals and groups share and integrate knowledge, the knowledge is stored in the organizational structure, systems, routines and procedures. This contrib￾utes to the development of technological capabilities that can be applied across projects (Burgelman and Rosen￾bloom, 1989; Prahalad and Hamel, 1990). When individ￾uals leave a team or organization, some of their knowl￾edge also leaves but, depending on the effectiveness of the organizational memory, some also remains as insti￾tutionalized practices. e-R&D networking tools can be used to capture and store knowledge through systemized collection and coding of tasks and projects in files and formal procedures and dissemination can be improved by the use of computer systems and organizational intranets. For example, information, expert, and prob￾lem–solution databases can be used to facilitate inter￾project learning. However, it is important to note that much R&D￾related knowledge is tacit, or difficult to codify. There￾fore it must be shared, stored and retrieved by more direct communications and sharing of experiences (Nonaka, 1994). It is critical during the new product development process to convert tacit knowledge stored in the organization’s memory into explicit knowledge that can be understood by individuals lacking experience in a specific area. To this end, e-R&D networking tools can help overcome barriers to this translation by aiding in the storage and dissemination of information (Huber, 1991). Hypothesis 1c. Organizations that leverage e
R&D networks in project groups’ institutionalized memory processes to a greater extent will be more successful innovators than those organizations that do so to a lesser extent. 2.5. A 3-dimensional model of Internet-driven e-R&D networked processes Second, I consider the nature and effects of applying the Internet to facilitate these knowledge flows via net￾worked R&D activities—i.e., e-R&D. In a global sense, I apply Deise et al.’s (2000) model to postulate that the Internet can (a) facilitate existing tasks in the R&D pro￾cess (can do the same stuff faster, cheaper, better)—it is an enhancement and of incremental value—and (b) the Internet fundamentally alters the R&D process (new game, new rules, new criteria, new steps, tasks, and sequences, etc..)—it is transformational and of frame￾breaking value. This is consistent with research in the innovation literature that suggests R&D projects should be distinguished by their degree of radicalness, or degree of change (Damanpour, 1991; Eisenhardt and Tabrizi, 1995; McDonough, 1993). Radical innovations are less certain, involve a greater proportion of experimentation and iterative problem solving, and hence require more flexibility and learning; e-R&D networking tools can provide low-risk experimentation options via electronic mediums and broad access to sources of information and learning. Incremental innovations are more certain, involve a greater proportion of planning and implemen￾tation, and hence require more efficiency and com￾pression; e-R&D networking tools can provide planning and organizational resources as well as cost-effective communication and distribution and systems

E.H. Kessler/Technovation 23(2003)905-915 Hypothesis 2a. An Internet-driven networked e-R& R&D Outcome D process can both enhance and transform R&D It is also important to heed the advice of scholars who knowledge flows and stages in the innovation process (e.g. Damanpour, 1991; Spender and Kessler, 1995). For example, Kessler et al.(2000) found that the func- tionality of applying external knowledge(such as that Internet Function accessed via the Internet)to the r&d process is different depending on the type of knowledge and the stage of R&d to which it is applied. This means that some tasks might be seen as more sensitive to e-R&D interventions R&D Process than others. Moreover, it is important to acknowledge that strategy and specifically new product innovation will be different depending on the industries and con- e-r&dy Fig. 2. 3-D model of Internet-driven networks influence on R&D (3D texts considered(e.g, He enderson and Mitchell. 1997 Schoonhoven et al., 1990). For instance, e-R&D migh be more valuable to teams within firms with a fast-fol- variables). It is essentially a tool for exploring the lower or efficient-producer strategy who need to access dynamics of e-R&D networks for each of the internal ing information, or perhaps within firms with a first- external, and memory knowledge flows described in the mover strategy who need to quickly create and inte- grate information The first dimension of the 3D e-R&D model is major Additionally, e-R&D might be more valuable to teams Internet attributes. ldentifying and analyzing the specific within large firms that have greater information systems functions of the Internet allows us to assess its potential capability or perhaps within small firms who may be benefits and detriments to the r&d process. Consider more flexible and receptive to new information and its for example the following functional features of the permutations. Extending this logic, it stands to reason Internet(Muller, 1999)as detailed in Table 1 that the internet will be more or less functional in differ- These Internet attributes can be simplified and con- ent types of competitive, technological, demographic, densed into the following four general categories of etc environments. For instance, e-R&D might be more Internet functions(Leshin, 1997) important in fast-moving contexts(e.g, it offers real time interpersonal access), hyper-competitive contexts 1. Communication(e.g, email): Allows group members (e.g, it may be exploited as a source of advantage), and to send, forward, and receive messages from people ambiguous contexts (e.g, it serves as a source of all over the world. Enables members to reply to, save information). Notwithstanding the many potential mod- file and categorize received messages. Enables mem- erating variables and permutations of their interactions, bers to participate in electronic conferences and dis- a more general argument is offered for these types of cussions as well as to request information from agenc- contingent relationships and testing specific phenomena ies, organizations, institutions, and other people within its logical umbrella Email represents one form of Internet communication Hypothesis 2b. The functionality of an Internet along with electronic discussion groups(listservs and driven networked e-R&d process will be moderated by usenet), Internet relay chat(IRC), Internet phones groups'context such as R&D stage, firm size and strat and desktop Internet video conferencing egy, and industry 2. Connection (e.g, Telnet): Provides the capability to We can develop a three-dimensional model to more a remote computer and work interactively specifically examine the functionality of various attri- with it. Allow group members to work on the remote butes of the Internet at various stages of the r&D pro- computer's power and speed and utilize its software cess on various r&d outcome variables Some services available through telnet include data- This 3d e-R&D model finds its roots in the logic of bases. libraries chats and bulletin boards similar models that explore multiple simultaneous inter- 3. Transfer(e.g, file transfer protocol, or FTP): Method actions such as the"House of Quality"(Hauser and that allows group members to move files and data Clausing, 1988). The 3D e-R&D model is used to exam- from one computer to another. Enables members to ine the effects of Internet application(segmented by its download (receive) and upload(send) information different attributes or functionalities) on the r&d team such as books. documents and software process(segmented by its different stages or sets of 4. Access(e.g, World Wide Web): Collection of stan- related activities) and manifest R&d outcomes dards and protocols used by group members to access (segmented by its different dimensions or strategic information available on the Internet such as docu-

E.H. Kessler / Technovation 23 (2003) 905–915 909 Hypothesis 2a. An Internet
driven networked e
R& D process can both enhance and transform R&D. It is also important to heed the advice of scholars who have pointed to a moderated relationship between knowledge flows and stages in the innovation process (e.g. Damanpour, 1991; Spender and Kessler, 1995). For example, Kessler et al. (2000) found that the func￾tionality of applying external knowledge (such as that accessed via the Internet) to the R&D process is different depending on the type of knowledge and the stage of R&D to which it is applied. This means that some tasks might be seen as more sensitive to e-R&D interventions than others. Moreover, it is important to acknowledge that strategy and specifically new product innovation will be different depending on the industries and con￾texts considered (e.g., Henderson and Mitchell, 1997; Schoonhoven et al., 1990). For instance, e-R&D might be more valuable to teams within firms with a fast-fol￾lower or efficient-producer strategy who need to access existing information, or perhaps within firms with a first￾mover strategy who need to quickly create and inte￾grate information. Additionally, e-R&D might be more valuable to teams within large firms that have greater information systems capability or perhaps within small firms who may be more flexible and receptive to new information and its permutations. Extending this logic, it stands to reason that the Internet will be more or less functional in differ￾ent types of competitive, technological, demographic, etc. environments. For instance, e-R&D might be more important in fast-moving contexts (e.g., it offers real￾time interpersonal access), hyper-competitive contexts (e.g., it may be exploited as a source of advantage), and ambiguous contexts (e.g., it serves as a source of information). Notwithstanding the many potential mod￾erating variables and permutations of their interactions, a more general argument is offered for these types of contingent relationships and testing specific phenomena within its logical umbrella. Hypothesis 2b. The functionality of an Internet
driven networked e
R&D process will be moderated by groups’ context such as R&D stage, firm size and strat￾egy, and industry. We can develop a three-dimensional model to more specifically examine the functionality of various attri￾butes of the Internet at various stages of the R&D pro￾cess on various R&D outcome variables—see Fig. 2. This 3D e-R&D model finds its roots in the logic of similar models that explore multiple simultaneous inter￾actions such as the “House of Quality” (Hauser and Clausing, 1988). The 3D e-R&D model is used to exam￾ine the effects of Internet application (segmented by its different attributes or functionalities) on the R&D team process (segmented by its different stages or sets of related activities) and manifest R&D outcomes (segmented by its different dimensions or strategic Fig. 2. 3-D model of Internet-driven networks influence on R&D (3D e-R&D). variables). It is essentially a tool for exploring the dynamics of e-R&D networks for each of the internal, external, and memory knowledge flows described in the preceding section. The first dimension of the 3D e-R&D model is major Internet attributes. Identifying and analyzing the specific functions of the Internet allows us to assess its potential benefits and detriments to the R&D process. Consider for example the following functional features of the Internet (Muller, 1999) as detailed in Table 1. These Internet attributes can be simplified and con￾densed into the following four general categories of Internet functions (Leshin, 1997): 1. Communication (e.g., email): Allows group members to send, forward, and receive messages from people all over the world. Enables members to reply to, save, file, and categorize received messages. Enables mem￾bers to participate in electronic conferences and dis￾cussions as well as to request information from agenc￾ies, organizations, institutions, and other people. Email represents one form of Internet communication, along with electronic discussion groups (listservs and usenets), Internet relay chat (IRC), Internet phones, and desktop Internet video conferencing. 2. Connection (e.g., Telnet): Provides the capability to login to a remote computer and work interactively with it. Allow group members to work on the remote computer’s power and speed and utilize its software. Some services available through Telnet include data￾bases, libraries, chats, and bulletin boards. 3. Transfer (e.g., file transfer protocol, or FTP): Method that allows group members to move files and data from one computer to another. Enables members to download (receive) and upload (send) information such as books, documents, and software. 4. Access (e.g., World Wide Web): Collection of stan￾dards and protocols used by group members to access information available on the Internet such as docu-