Revisiting the Role of Collaboration in Creating Breakthrough Inventions

References

• Ahuja G , Lampert CM (2001) Entrepreneurship in the large corporation: A longitudinal study of how established firms create breakthrough inventions. Strategic Management J. 22(6–7):521–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allison PD (1999) Comparing logit and probit coefficients across groups. Sociol. Methods Res. 28(2):186–208.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY , Clark KB (2000) Design Rules: The Power of Modularity (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baldwin CY , Henkel J (2015) Modularity and intellectual property protection. Strategic Management J. 36(11):1637–1655.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Beard A (2013) Interview with Philippe Starck. Harvard Bus. Rev. (April), https://hbr.org/2013/04/philippe-starck.Google Scholar
• Bercovitz J , Feldman M (2011) The mechanisms of collaboration in inventive teams: Composition, social networks, and geography. Res. Policy 40(1):81–93.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bloch P (1995) Seeking the ideal form: Product design and consumer response. J. Marketing 59(3):16–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Blondel VD , Guillaume JL , Lambiotte R , Lefebvre E (2008) Fast unfolding of communities in large networks. J. Statist. Mech. Theory Experiment. 10(P10008):1–12.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ , Lakhani KR (2012) The confederacy of heterogeneous software organizations and heterogeneous developers: Field experimental evidence on sorting and worker effort the confederacy of heterogeneous software organizations. Lerner J , Stern S , eds. The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity Revisited (National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA), 483–502.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ , Brady T , Ganguli I , Gaule P , Guinan E , Hollenberg A , Lakhani KR (2017) A field experiment on search costs and the formation of scientific collaborations. Rev. Econom. Statist. 99(4):565–576.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Brown T (2008) Design thinking. Harvard Bus. Rev. (June), https://hbr.org/2008/06/design-thinking.Google Scholar
• Chan TH , Mihm J , Sosa ME (2018) On styles in product design: An analysis of US design patents. Management Sci. 64(3):1230–1249.Link, Google Scholar
• Conti R , Gambardella A , Mariani M (2014) Learning to be Edison: Inventors, organizations, and breakthrough inventions. Organ. Sci. 25(3):833–849.Link, Google Scholar
• Cooper BDJ , Kagel JH (2005) Are two heads better than one? Team vs. individual play in signaling games. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(3):477–509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Coutu D (2009) Why teams don’t work. Harvard Bus. Rev. (May), https://hbr.org/2009/05/why-teams-dont-work.Google Scholar
• Dahan E , Kim AJ , Lo AW , Poggio T , Chan N (2011) Securities trading of concepts (STOC). J. Marketing Res. 48(3):497–517.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dice LR (1945) Measures of the amount of ecologic association between species. Ecology 26(3):297–302.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Diehl M , Stroebe W (1987) Productivity loss in brainstorming groups: Toward the solution of a riddle. J. Personality Soc. Psych. 53(3):497–509.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eckert C (2001) The communication bottleneck in knitwear design: Analysis and computing solutions. Comput. Supported Cooperative Work 10(1):29–74.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Economist, The (2012) Apple v Samsung: iPhone, uCopy, iSue. The Economist (September 1), https://www.economist.com/leaders/2012/09/01/iphone-ucopy-isue.Google Scholar
• Faber RC (2001) Landis on Mechanics of Patent Claim Drafting , 5th ed. (Practising Law Institute, New York).Google Scholar
• Fleming L , Sorenson O (2001) Technology as a complex adaptive system: Evidence from patent data. Res. Policy 30(7):1019–1039.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L , Mingo S , Chen D (2007) Collaborate brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52(3):443–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Girotra K , Terwiesch C , Ulrich KT (2010) Idea generation and the quality of the best idea. Management Sci. 56(4):591–605.Link, Google Scholar
• Gokpinar B , Hopp WJ , Iravani SMR (2010) The impact of misalignment of organizational structure and product architecture on quality in complex product development. Management Sci. 56(3):468–484.Link, Google Scholar
• Goldstone RL (1994) The role of similarity in categorization: Providing a groundwork. Cognition 52(2):125–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Guzzo RA , Dickson MW (1996) Teams in organizations: Recent research on performance and effectiveness. Annual Rev. Psych. 47:307–338.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH , Jaffe AB , Trajtenberg M (2005) Market value and patent citations. RAND J. Econom. 36(1):16–38.Google Scholar
• Hamel G (1991) Competition for competence and inter-partner learning within international strategic alliances. Strategic Management J. 12(S1):83–103.Google Scholar
• Hargadon AB , Sutton RI (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(4):716–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Harhoff D , Wagner S (2009) The duration of patent examination at the European Patent Office. Management Sci. 55(12):1969–1984.Google Scholar
• Henderson R , Clark KB (1990) Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Admin. Sci. Quart. 35(1):9–30.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hoetker G (2007) The use of logit and probit models in strategic management research: Critical issues. Strategic Management J. 28(4):331–343.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hutchison-Krupat J , Chao RO (2014) Tolerance for failure and incentives for collaborative innovation. Production Oper. Management 23(8):1265–1285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jones BF (2009) The burden of knowledge and the “death of the renaissance man”: Is innovation getting harder? Rev. Econom. Stud. 76(1):283–317.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kavadias S , Sommer SC (2009) The effects of problem structure and team diversity on brainstorming effectiveness. Management Sci. 55(12):1899–1913.Link, Google Scholar
• Kerr N , Tindale S (2004) Group performance and decision making. Annual Rev. Psych. 55(1):623–655.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kornish L , Ulrich K (2014) The importance of the raw idea in innovation: Testing the sow’s ear hypothesis. J. Marketing Res. 51(1):14–26.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Krishnan V , Ulrich K (2001) Product development decisions: A review of the literature. Management Sci. 47(1):1–21.Link, Google Scholar
• Lakhani KR , Assaf HL , Tushman ML (2013) Open innovation and organizational boundaries: Task decomposition, knowledge distribution and the locus of innovation. Grandori A , ed. Handbook of Economic Organization: Integrating Economic and Organization Theory (Edward Elgar Publishing, Northampton, MA), 355–382.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lanjouw JO , Schankerman M (2004) Patent quality and research productivity: Measuring innovation with multiple indicators. Econom. J. 114(495):441–465.Google Scholar
• Li G-C , Lai R , Amour A , Doolin D , Sun Y , Torvik V , Yu A , Fleming L (2014) Disambiguation and co-authorship networks of the U.S. patent inventor database (1975–2010). Res. Policy 43(6):941–955.Google Scholar
• Liu H , Mihm J , Sosa ME (2018) Where do stars come from? The role of star vs. non-star collaborators in creative settings. Organ. Sci. 29(6):1149–1169.Link, Google Scholar
• MacCormack A , Baldwin C , Rusnak J (2012) Exploring the duality between product and organizational architectures: A test of the “mirroring” hypothesis. Res. Policy 41(8):1309–1324.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Maeda J (2015) Have designers killed the engineering star? Interview by Emily Chang. Bloomberg West (May 18), Video, 3:07, http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2015-05-19/the-growing-importance-of-designers-in-silicon-valley.Google Scholar
• Manning CD , Bauer J , Finkel J , Bethard SJ , Surdeanu M , McClosky D (2014) The Stanford CoreNLP natural language processing toolkit. Bontcheva K, Jingbo Z, eds. Proc. 52nd Annual Meeting Assoc. Comput. Linguistics System Demonstrations (Association for Computational Linguistics, Stroudsburg, PA), 55–60.Google Scholar
• McCormack JP , Cagan J , Vogel C (2004) Speaking the Buick language: Capturing, understanding, and exploring brand identity with shape grammars. Design Stud. 25(1):1–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mihm J , Loch C , Huchzermeier A (2003) Problem-solving oscillations in complex engineering projects. Management Sci. 49(6):733–750.Link, Google Scholar
• Molotch H (2003) Where Stuff Comes From: How Toasters, Toilets, Cars, Computers and Many Other Things Come to Be As They Are (Routledge, New York).Google Scholar
• Newman MEJ (2006) Modularity and community structure in networks. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 103(23):8577–8582.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Obstfeld D (2005) Social networks, the tertius iungens orientation, and involvement in innovation. Admin. Sci. Quart. 50(1):100–130.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Oettl A (2012) Reconceptualizing stars: Scientist helpfulness and peer performance. Management Sci. 58(410):1122–1140.Link, Google Scholar
• Olson GM , Olson JS , Carter MR , Storrøsten M (1992) Small group design meetings: An analysis of collaboration. Human-Comput. Interaction 7(4):347–374.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Orth UR , Malkewitz K (2008) Holistic package design and consumer brand impressions. J. Marketing 72(3):64–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Perry-Smith JE , Shalley CEC (2003) The social side of creativity: A static and dynamic social network perspective. Acad. Management Rev. 28(1):89–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pisano GP , Verganti R (2008) Which kind of collaboration is right for you? Harvard Bus. Rev. 86(12):1–7.Google Scholar
• Powell W , Koput K , Smith-Doerr L (1996) Interorganizational collaboration and the locus of innovation: Networks of learning in biotechnology. Admin. Sci. Quart. 54(2):116–145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Powell W , White D , Koput K , Owen-Smith J (2013) Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences. Amer. J. Sociol. 110(4):1132–1205.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pugliese M , Cagan J (2002) Capturing a rebel: Modeling the Harley-Davidson brand through a motorcycle shape grammar. Res. Engrg. Design 13(3):139–156.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Puranam P (2018) The Microstructure of Organizations (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Saidman PJ (2008) What is the point of the point of novelty test for design patent infringement? J. Patent Trademark Office Soc. 90(June):401–422.Google Scholar
• Schilling MA (2000) Toward a general modular systems theory and its application to interfirm product modularity. Acad. Management Rev. 25(2):312–334.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1969) The Sciences of the Artificial , 3rd ed. (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Singh J (2005) Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Sci. 51(5):756–770.Link, Google Scholar
• Singh J , Fleming L (2010) Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Sci. 56(1):41–56.Link, Google Scholar
• Smith R , Eppinger S (1997) Identifying controlling features of engineering design iteration. Management Sci. 43(3):276–293.Link, Google Scholar
• Sosa ME , Eppinger SD , Rowles CM (2004) The misalignment of product architecture and organizational structure in complex product development. Management Sci. 50(12):1674–1689.Link, Google Scholar
• Sosa ME , Eppinger SD , Pich M , McKendrick DG , Stout SK (2002) Factors that influence technical communication in distributed product development: An empirical study in the telecommunications industry. IEEE Trans. Engrg. Management 49(1):45–58.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stacey M (2006) Psychological challenges for the analysis of style. Artificial Intelligence Engrg. Design Anal. Manufacturing 20(3):167–184.Google Scholar
• Sutton RI , Hargadon A (1996) Brainstorming groups in context: Effectiveness in a product design firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 41(4):685–718.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Taylor A , Greve HR (2006) Superman or the Fantastic Four? Knowledge combination and experience in innovative teams. Acad. Management J. 49(4):723–740.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Terza J , Basu A , Rathouz PJ (2008) Two-stage residual inclusion estimation. J. Health Econom. 27(3):531–543.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ulrich K (1995) The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Res. Policy 24(3):419–440.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ulrich K (2011) Design is everything? J. Product Innovation Management 28(3):394–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (2010) Manual of Patent Examination Procedures , 8th ed. (U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA).Google Scholar
• Verganti R (2009) Design Driven Innovation (Harvard Business School Publishing Corporation, Boston).Google Scholar
• von Hippel E (1990) Task partitioning: An innovation process variable. Res. Policy 19(5):407–418.Crossref, Google Scholar
• von Hippel E (1998) Economics of product development by users: The impact of “sticky” local information. Management Sci. 44(5):629–644.Link, Google Scholar
• Wooldridge J (2010) Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Wooldridge J (2012) Introductory Econometrics: A Modern Approach , 5th ed. (South-Western Cengage Learning, Mason, OH).Google Scholar
• Wooldridge J (2015) Control function methods in applied econometrics. J. Human Resources 50(2):420–445.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wuchty S , Jones BF , Uzzi B (2007) The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316(5827):1036–1039.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Xia Y , Singhal VR , Zhang GP (2016) Product design awards and the market value of the firm. Production Oper. Management 25(6):1038–1055.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Yayavaram S , Ahuja G (2008) Decomposability in knowledge structures and its impact on the usefulness of inventions and knowledge-base malleability. Admin. Sci. Quart. 53(2):333–362.Crossref, Google Scholar