Sourcing Innovation: Integrated System or Individual Components?

References

• Ales L, Cho S-H, Körpeoğlu E (2017) Optimal award scheme in innovation tournaments. Oper. Res. 65(3):693–702.Link, Google Scholar
• Ales L, Cho S-H, Körpeoğlu E (2020) Innovation tournaments with multiple contributors. Production Oper. Management, ePub ahead of print December 10, https://doi.org/10.1111/poms.13342.Google Scholar
• Aoki K, Wilhelm M (2017) The role of ambidexterity in managing buyer-supplier relationships: The Toyota case. Organ. Sci. 28(6):1080–1097.Link, Google Scholar
• Apostol R (2017) Trials and Tribulations in the Implementation of Pre-Commercial Procurement in Europe (T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, Netherlands).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Banker S (2019) SAP and Oracle vs. the best of breeds. Forbes (December 26), https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2019/12/26/sap-and-oracle-versus-the-best-of-breeds/?sh=3e92079b3aab.Google Scholar
• Beil D (2010) Procurement auctions. J. J. Hasenbein, ed. Risk and Optimization in an Uncertain World, TutORials in Operations Research (INFORMS, Catonsville, MD), 248–259.Link, Google Scholar
• Beil D, Wein L (2003) An inverse-optimization-based auction mechanism to support a multiattribute RFQ process. Management Sci. 49(11):1529–1545.Link, Google Scholar
• Beil D, Chen Q, Duenyas I, See B (2018) When to deploy test auctions in sourcing. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 20(2):232–248.Link, Google Scholar
• Bhaskaran S, Krishnan V (2009) Effort, revenue, and cost sharing mechanisms for collaborative new product development. Management Sci. 55(7):1152–1169.Link, Google Scholar
• Bimpikis K, Ehsani S, Mostagir M (2019) Designing dynamic contests. Oper. Res. 67(2):339–356.Abstract, Google Scholar
• Bonaccorsi A, Lipparini A (1994) Strategic partnerships in new product development: An Italian case study. J. Product Innovation Management 11(2):134–145.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bradford M (2015) Modern ERP: Select, Implement, and Use Today’s Advanced Business Systems, 3rd ed. (Lulu Enterprises, Raleigh, NC).Google Scholar
• Cabral L, Cozzi G, Denicolò V, Spagnolo G, Zanza M (2006) Procuring innovations. Dimitri N, Piga G, Spagnolo G, eds., Handbook of Procurement (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK), 483–529.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cachon G, Zhang F (2006) Procuring fast delivery: Sole sourcing with information asymmetry. Management Sci. 52(6):881–896.Link, Google Scholar
• Calzolari G, Felli L, Koenen J, Spagnolo G, Stahl K (2019) Trust, competition and innovation: Theory and evidence from German car manufacturers. CESifo Working Paper 5229, Center for Economic Studies and Ifo Institute, Munich.Google Scholar
• Chaturvedi A, Martínez-de-Albéniz V (2011) Optimal procurement design in the presence of supply risk. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 13(2):227–243.Link, Google Scholar
• Chaturvedi A, Beil D, Martínez-de-Albéniz V (2014) Split-award auctions for supplier retention. Management Sci. 60(7):1719–1737.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen F (2007) Auctioning supply contracts. Management Sci. 53(10):1562–1576.Link, Google Scholar
• Chen R, Roundy R, Zhang R, Janakiraman G (2005) Efficient auction mechanisms for supply chain procurement. Management Sci. 51(3):467–482.Link, Google Scholar
• Chesbrough H (2003) Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology (Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Chu L (2009) Truthful bundle/multi-unit double auctions. Management Sci. 55(7):1184–1198.Link, Google Scholar
• Clark KB, Fujimoto T (1991) Product Development Performance (Harvard Business School Press, Boston).Google Scholar
• Cooper R, Slagmulder R (1999) Supply Chain Development for the Lean Enterprise: Interorganizational Cost Management (Productivity Press, Portland, OR).Google Scholar
• Dasgupta S, Spulber D (1989–90) Managing procurement auctions. Inform. Econom. Policy 4(1):5–29.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Deng S-J, Elmaghraby W (2005) Supplier selection via tournaments. Production Oper. Management 14(2):252–267.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Duenyas I, Hu B, Beil D (2013) Simple auctions for supply contracts. Management Sci. 59(10):2332–2342.Link, Google Scholar
• Elmaghraby W (2000) Supply contract competition and sourcing policies. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 2(4):350–371.Link, Google Scholar
• Elmaghraby W, Keskinocak P (2004) Combinatorial auctions in procurement. Harrison T, Lee H, Neale J, eds. The Practice of Supply Chain Management: Where Theory and Application Converge (Springer, Boston), 245–258.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Erat S, Krishnan V (2012) Managing delegated search over design spaces. Management Sci. 58(3):606–623.Link, Google Scholar
• Erridge A, Nondi R (1994) Public procurement, competition and partnership. Eur. J. Purchasing Supply Management 1(3):169–179.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Foy H (2014) Age of mega supplier heralds danger for carmakers. Financial Times (May 18), https://www.ft.com/content/50c272c4-dce9-11e3-ba13-00144feabdc0.Google Scholar
• Fujimoto T (1994) The origin and evolution of the black box parts practice in the Japanese auto industry. University of Tokyo Working Paper, University of Tokyo, Tokyo.Google Scholar
• Fullerton R, McAfee R (1999) Auctioning entry into tournaments. J. Polit. Econom. 107(3):573–605.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gur Y, Lu L, Weintraub G (2017) Framework agreements in procurement: An auction model and design recommendations. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 19(4):586–603.Link, Google Scholar
• Homfeldt F, Rese A, Brenner H, Baier D, Schäfer T (2017) Identification and generation of innovative ideas in the procurement of the automotive industry: The case of AUDI AG. Internat. J. Innovation Management 21(7):1–31.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hu M, Wang L (2020) Joint vs. separate crowdsourcing contests. Management Sci. ePub ahead of print, October 5, https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2020.3683.Link, Google Scholar
• Jiang Z, Huang Y, Beil D (2020) The role of feedback in dynamic crowdsourcing contests: A structural empirical analysis. Ross School of Business Paper 1334, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
• Konrad K (2009) Strategy and Dynamics in Contests (Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Körpeoğlu E, Cho S-H (2018) Incentives in contests with heterogeneous solvers. Management Sci. 64(6):2709–2715.Link, Google Scholar
• Körpeoğlu E, Körpeoğlu G, Hafalir I (2017) Parallel innovation contests. Preprint, submitted March 1, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2924817.Google Scholar
• Körpeoğlu G, Körpeoğlu E, Tunç S (2020) Optimal duration of innovation contests. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management, ePub ahead of print October 7, https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2020.0935.Google Scholar
• Kostamis D, Beil D, Duenyas I (2009) Total-cost procurement auctions: Impact of suppliers’ cost adjustments on auction format choice. Management Sci. 55(12):1985–1999.Link, Google Scholar
• Laffont J-J, Tirole J (1993) A Theory of Incentives in Procurement and Regulation (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Langner B, Seidel V (2009) Collaborative concept development using supplier competitions: Insights from the automotive industry. J. Engrg. Tech. Management 26(1–2):1–14.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Larson E, Gobeli D (1988) Organizing for product development projects. J. Product Innovation Management 5(3):180–190.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Lazear E, Rosen S (1981) Rank-order tournaments as optimum labor contracts. J. Polit. Econom. 89(5):841–864.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Levin J (2003) Relational incentive contracts. Amer. Econom. Rev. 93(3):835–857.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Li C, Debo L (2009) Second sourcing vs. sole sourcing with capacity investment and asymmetric information. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 11(3):448–470.Link, Google Scholar
• Li C, Wan Z (2017) Supplier competition and cost improvement. Management Sci. 63(8):2460–2477.Link, Google Scholar
• Lichtenberg F (1988) The private R&D investment response to federal design and technical competitions. Amer. Econom. Rev. 78(3):550–559.Google Scholar
• Liker J, Choi T (2004) Building deep supplier relationships. Harvard Bus. Rev. 82(12):104–113.Google Scholar
• Liker J, Meier D (2006) The Toyota Way Fieldbook: A Practical Guide for Implementing Toyota’s 4Ps (McGraw-Hill, New York).Google Scholar
• Magal S, Word J (2012) Integrated Business Processes with ERP Systems (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ).Google Scholar
• Maurer A, Dietz F, Lang N (2004) Beyond cost reduction: Reinventing the automotive OEM-supplier interface. Report, Boston Consulting Group, Boston.Google Scholar
• McCutcheon D, Stuart F (2000) Issues in the choice of supplier alliance partners. J. Oper. Management 18(3):279–301.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mihm J, Schlapp J (2019) Sourcing innovation: On feedback in contests. Management Sci. 65(2):559–576.Link, Google Scholar
• Moldovanu B, Sela A (2001) The optimal allocation of prizes in contests. Amer. Econom. Rev. 91(3):542–558.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Molloy O, Tilley S, Warman E (1998) Design for Manufacturing and Assembly: Concepts, Architectures and Implementation (Springer Science+Business Media, Dordrecht, Netherlands).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mueller F, Stahl K, Wachtler F (2016) Upstream relationships in the automotive industry: A contractual perspective. Universität Mannheim Working Paper, Universität Mannheim, Mannheim, Germany.Google Scholar
• Nalebuff B, Stiglitz J (1983) Prizes and incentives: Toward a general theory of compensation and competition. Bell J. Econom. 14(1):21–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nittala L, Krishnan V (2016) Designing internal innovation contests. UCSD Working Paper, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA.Google Scholar
• Olivares M, Weintraub G, Epstein R, Yung D (2012) Combinatorial auctions for procurement: An empirical study of the Chilean school meals auction. Management Sci. 58(8):1458–1481.Link, Google Scholar
• Pisano G (2015) You need an innovation strategy. Harvard Bus. Rev. 93(6):44–54.Google Scholar
• Roels G (2014) Optimal design of coproductive services: Interaction and work allocation. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 16(4):578–594.Link, Google Scholar
• Rogerson W (1989) Profit regulation of defense contractors and prizes for innovation. J. Polit. Econom. 97(6):1284–1305.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Russo F, Spiller P, Wagner F (2017) Procuring innovation wherever it may be. Report, McKinsey & Company.Google Scholar
• Scotchmer S (2004) Innovation and Incentives (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Siegel R (2009) All-pay contests. Econometrica 77(1):71–92.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stouras KI, Hutchison-Krupat J, Chao RO (2021) The role of participation in innovation contests. Management Sci. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• Taylor C (1995) Digging for golden carrots: An analysis of research tournaments. Amer. Econom. Rev. 85(4):872–890.Google Scholar
• Terwiesch C, Xu Y (2008) Innovation contests, open innovation, and multiagent problem solving. Management Sci. 54(9):1529–1543.Link, Google Scholar
• Ulrich K, Sartorius D, Pearson S, Jakiela M (1993) Including the value of time in design-for-manufacturing decision making. Management Sci. 39(4):429–447.Link, Google Scholar
• Vickrey W (1961) Counterspeculation, auctions, and competitive sealed tenders. J. Finance 16(1):8–37.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wan Z, Beil D (2009) RFQ auctions with supplier qualification screening. Oper. Res. 57(4):934–949.Link, Google Scholar
• Wan Z, Beil D, Katok E (2012) When does it pay to delay supplier qualification? Theory and experiments. Management Sci. 58(11):2057–2075.Link, Google Scholar
• Yang Z, Aydin G, Babich V, Beil D (2012) Using a dual-sourcing option in the presence of asymmetric information about supplier reliability: Competition vs. diversification. Manufacturing Service Oper. Management 14(2):202–217.Link, Google Scholar