Ambition Is Nothing Without Focus: Compensating for Negative Transfer of Experience in R&D

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
• Albert MB, Avery D, Narin F, McAllister P (1991) Direct validation of citation counts as indicators of industrially important patents. Res. Policy 20(3):251–259.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Alcácer J, Gittelman M (2006) Patent citations as a measure of knowledge flows: The influence of examiner citations. Rev. Econom. Statist. 88(4):774–779.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Allison PD, Waterman RP (2002) Fixed-effects negative binomial regression models. Sociol. Methodol. 32(1):247–265.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Almeida P, Kogut B (1999) Localization of knowledge and the mobility of engineers in regional networks. Management Sci. 45(7):905–917.Link, Google Scholar
• Ambrosini V, Bowman C (2005) Reducing causal ambiguity to facilitate strategic learning. Management Learn. 36(4):493–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ambrosini V, Bowman C (2010) The impact of causal ambiguity on competitive advantage and rent appropriation. British J. Management 21(4):939–953.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Argote L (1999) Organizational Learning: Creating, Retaining and Transferring Knowledge (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston).Google Scholar
• Argote L, Miron-Spektor E (2011) Organizational learning: From experience to knowledge. Organ. Sci. 22(5):1123–1137.Link, Google Scholar
• Argote L, Beckman SL, Epple D (1990) The persistence and transfer of learning in industrial settings. Management Sci. 36(2):140–154.Link, Google Scholar
• Barkema HG, Schijven M (2008) How do firms learn to make acquisitions? A review of past research and an agenda for the future. J. Management 34(3):594–634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Basalla G (1988) The Evolution of Technology (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK).Google Scholar
• Benner MJ (2010) Securities analysts and incumbent response to radical technological change: Evidence from digital photography and Internet telephony. Organ. Sci. 21(1):42–62.Link, Google Scholar
• Berlin I (1953) The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy’s View of History (Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London).Google Scholar
• Bigley GA, Roberts KH (2001) The incident command system: High-reliability organizing for complex and volatile task environments. Acad. Management J. 44(6):1281–1299.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boh WF, Ren Y, Kiesler S, Bussjaeger R (2007) Expertise and collaboration in the geographically dispersed organization. Organ. Sci. 18(4):595–612.Link, Google Scholar
• Briggs GE, Naylor JC (1962) The relative efficiency of several training methods as a function of transfer task complexity. J. Experiment. Psych. 64(5):505–512.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cattani G (2005) Preadaptation, firm heterogeneity, and technological performance: A study on the evolution of fiber optics, 1970–1995. Organ. Sci. 16(6):563–580.Link, Google Scholar
• Coff RW (1997) Human assets and management dilemmas: Coping with hazards on the road to resource-based theory. Acad. Management Rev. 22(2):374–402.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cohen MD (1991) Individual learning and organizational routine: Emerging connections. Organ. Sci. 2(1):135–139.Link, Google Scholar
• Cooper RG, Edgett SJ, Kleinschmidt EJ (1999) New product portfolio management: Practices and performance. J. Product Innovation Management 16(4):333–351.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Cormier S, Hagman J (1987) Transfer of Learning: Contemporary Research and Applications (Academic Press, San Diego).Google Scholar
• Cyert RM, March JG (1963) A Behavioral Theory of the Firm (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• Dahlin KB, Behrens DM (2005) When is an invention really radical? Res. Policy 34(5):717–737.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Darr ED, Argote L, Epple D (1995) The acquisition, transfer, and depreciation of knowledge in service organizations: Productivity in franchises. Management Sci. 41(11):1750–1762.Link, Google Scholar
• Denrell J, Fang C, Levinthal DA (2004) From T-mazes to labyrinths: Learning from model-based feedback. Management Sci. 50(10):1366–1378.Link, Google Scholar
• Dodgson M (1993) Organizational learning: A review of some literatures. Organ. Stud. 14(3):375–394.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Eggers JP (2012) All experience is not created equal: Learning, adapting, and focusing in product portfolio management. Strategic Management J. 33(3):315–335.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Elio R, Anderson J (1981) The effects of category generalizations and instance similarity on schema abstraction. J. Experiment. Psych.: Human Learn. Memory 7(6):397–417.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ellis H (1965) The Transfer of Learning (Macmillan, New York).Google Scholar
• Finkelstein S, Haleblian J (2002) Understanding acquisition performance: The role of transfer effects. Organ. Sci. 13(1):36–47.Link, Google Scholar
• Fleming L (2001) Recombinant uncertainty in technological search. Management Sci. 47(1):117–132.Link, 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, Sorenson O (2004) Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management J. 25(89):909–928.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Mingo S, Chen D (2007) Collaborative brokerage, generative creativity, and creative success. Admin. Sci. Quart. 52(3):443–475.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fowler J, Aksnes D (2007) Does self-citation pay? Scientometrics 72(3):427–437.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gick ML, Holyoak KJ (1987) The cognitive basis of knowledge transfer. Cormier SM, Hagman JD, eds. Transfer of Learning: Contemporary Research and Applications (Academic Press, San Diego), 9–46.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hagedoorn J, Cloodt M (2003) Measuring innovative performance: Is there an advantage in using multiple indicators? Res. Policy 32(8):1365–1379.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haleblian J, Finkelstein S (1999) The influence of organizational acquisition experience on acquisition performance: A behavioral learning perspective. Admin. Sci. Quart. 44(1):29–56.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2001) The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER Working Paper 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Hall BH, Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M (2005) Market value and patent citations. RAND J. Econom. 36(1):16–38.Google Scholar
• Hargadon AB (2002) Brokering knowledge: Linking learning and innovation. Res. Organ. Behav. 24:41–85.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hargadon A, Sutton RI (1997) Technology brokering and innovation in a product development firm. Admin. Sci. Quart. 42(4):716–749.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Haskell RE (2001) Transfer of Learning: Cognition, Instruction, and Reasoning (Academic Press, Waltham, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Helfat CE, Finkelstein S, Mitchell W, Peteraf MA, Singh H, Winter SG (2007) Dynamic Capabilities: Understanding Strategic Change in Organizations (Blackwell, Malden, MA).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
• Holyoak K, Koh K (1987) Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer. Memory Cognition 15(4):332–340.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hox JJ (2010) Multilevel Analysis: Techniques and Applications, 2nd ed. (Routledge, New York).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hsu DH, Lim K (2013) Knowledge brokering and organizational innovation: Founder imprinting effects. Organ. Sci. Forthcoming.Google Scholar
• Katila R, Ahuja G (2002) Something old, something new: A longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Acad. Management J. 45(6):1183–1194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• King G, Tomz M, Wittenberg J (2000) Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. Amer. J. Political Sci. 44(2):347–361.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Langer EJ (1997) The Power of Mindful Learning (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA).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
• Levinthal D, Rerup C (2006) Crossing an apparent chasm: Bridging mindful and less-mindful perspectives on organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 17(4):502–513.Link, Google Scholar
• March JG (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning. Organ. Sci. 2(1):71–87.Link, Google Scholar
• March JG, Simon HA (1958) Organizations (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Martin X, Mitchell W (1998) The influence of local search and performance heuristics on new design introduction in a new product market. Res. Policy 26(8):753–771.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mazur JE (1986) Learning Behavior (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ).Google Scholar
• McCulloch CE, Searle SR, Neuhaus JM (2008) Generalized Linear, and Mixed Models, 2nd ed. (John Wiley & Sons, New York).Google Scholar
• Moorman C, Miner AS (1997) The impact of organizational memory on new product performance and creativity. J. Marketing Res. 34(1):91–106.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mowery DC, Sampat BN, Ziedonis AA (2002) Learning to patent: Institutional experience, learning, and the characteristics of U.S. university patents after the Bayh-Dole Act, 1981–1992. Management Sci. 48(1):73–89.Link, Google Scholar
• Naylor JC, Briggs GE (1963) Effects of task complexity and task organization on the relative efficiency of part and whole training methods. J. Experiment. Psych. 65(3):217–224.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Naylor JC, Briggs GE (1965) Team-training effectiveness under various conditions. J. Appl. Psych. 49(4):223–229.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Nelson RR, Winter SG (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Nerkar A (2003) Old is gold? The value of temporal exploration in the creation of new knowledge. Management Sci. 49(2):211–229.Link, Google Scholar
• Nerkar A, Paruchuri S (2005) Evolution of R&D capabilities: The role of knowledge networks within a firm. Management Sci. 51(5):771–785.Link, Google Scholar
• Novick LR (1988) Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. J. Experiment. Psych.: Learn., Memory, Cognition 14(3):510–520.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ocasio W (1997) Towards an attention-based view of the firm. Strategic Management J. 18(S1):187–206.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Paruchuri S (2010) Intraorganizational networks, interorganizational networks, and the impact of central inventors: A longitudinal study of pharmaceutical firms. Organ. Sci. 21(1):63–80.Link, Google Scholar
• Perkins DN, Salomon G (1994) Transfer of learning. Husen T, Postelwhite TN, eds. International Handbook of Educational Research (Oxford University Press, New York), 6452–6457.Google Scholar
• Peterson MF, Arregle J-L, Martin X (2012) Multilevel models in international business research. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 43(5):451–457.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Potts HE (1944) The definition of invention in patent law. Modern Law Rev. 7(3):113–123.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rabe-Hesketh S, Skrondal A, Pickles A (2008) Multilevel and Longitudinal Modeling Using Stata, 2nd ed. (Stata Press, College Station, TX).Google Scholar
• Raudenbush SW, Bryk AS (2002) Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods, 2nd ed. (Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA).Google Scholar
• Reagans R, Argote L, Brooks D (2005) Individual experience and experience working together: Predicting learning rates from knowing who knows what and knowing how to work together. Management Sci. 51(6):869–881.Link, Google Scholar
• Reber AS, Kassin SM, Lewis S, Cantor G (1980) On the relationship between implicit and explicit modes in the learning of a complex rule structure. J. Experiment. Psych.: Human Learn. Memory 6(5):492–502.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reed R, DeFillippi RJ (1990) Causal ambiguity, barriers to imitation, and sustainable competitive advantage. Acad. Management Rev. 15(1):88–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Reeves LM, Weisberg RW (1994) The role of content and abstract information in analogical transfer. Psych. Bull. 115(3):381–400.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rivkin JW (2000) Imitation of complex strategies. Management Sci. 46(6):824–844.Link, Google Scholar
• Rosenkopf L, Nerkar A (2001) Beyond local search: Boundary-spanning, exploration, and impact in the optical disk industry. Strategic Management J. 22(4):287–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Rysman M, Simcoe T (2008) Patents and the performance of voluntary standard-setting organizations. Management Sci. 54(11):1920–1934.Link, Google Scholar
• Schick AG, Ponemon LA (1993) The influence of auditors’ perceptions of organizational decline on audit risk. Organ. Sci. 4(1):92–107.Link, Google Scholar
• Schmookler J (1966) Invention and Economic Growth (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schreyögg G, Kliesch-Eberl M (2007) How dynamic can organizational capabilities be? Towards a dual-process model of capability dynamization. Strategic Management J. 28(9):913–933.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Schumpeter JA (1934) The Theory of Economic Development (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Scuricini GB (1988) Complexity in large technological systems. Peliti L, Vulpiani A, eds. Measures of Complexity, Lecture Notes in Physics, Vol. 314 (Springer-Verlag, New York),83–101.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Shamsie J, Martin X, Miller D (2009) In with the old, in with the new: Capabilities, strategies, and performance among the Hollywood studios. Strategic Management J. 30(13):1440–1452.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Siggelkow N, Levinthal DA (2003) Temporarily divide to conquer: Centralized decentralized and reintegrated organizational approaches to exploration and adaptation. Organ. Sci. 14(6):650–669.Link, Google Scholar
• Simon HA (1962) The architecture of complexity. Proc. Amer. Philos. Soc. 106(6):467–482.Google Scholar
• Singh J (2007) Asymmetry of knowledge spillovers between MNCs and host country firms. J. Internat. Bus. Stud. 38(5):764–786.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O, Fleming L (2004) Science and the diffusion of knowledge. Res. Policy 33(10):1615–1634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O, Rivkin JW, Fleming L (2006) Complexity, networks and knowledge flow. Res. Policy 35(7):994–1017.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart TE (1998) Network positions and propensities to collaborate: An investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology industry. Admin. Sci. Quart. 43(3):668–698.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart TE, Podolny JM (1996) Local search and the evolution of technological capabilities. Strategic Management J. 17(S1):21–38.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thorndike E (1898) Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associate processes in animals. Psych. Rev. Monogr. 2(4):1–8.Google Scholar
• Trajtenberg M (1990) A penny for your quotes: Patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND J. Econom. 21(1):172–187.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Tripsas M, Gavetti G (2000) Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: Evidence from digital imaging. Strategic Management J. 21(10–11):1147–1161.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Usher AP (1954) A History of Mechanical Inventions, 2nd ed. (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Van De Ven AH, Polley D (1992) Learning while innovating. Organ. Sci. 3(1):92–116.Link, Google Scholar
• Walsh JP, Ungson GR (1991) Organizational memory. Acad. Management Rev. 16(1):57–91.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM (2001) Managing the Unexpected (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco).Google Scholar
• Winter SG (1987) Knowledge and competence as strategic assets. Teece DJ, ed. The Competitive Challenge (Ballinger Publishing, Cambridge, MA), 159–184.Google Scholar
• Wooldridge JM (1999) Quasi-likelihood methods for count data. Pesaran MH, Schmidt P, eds. Handbook of Applied Econometrics: Microeconomics, Vol. 2 (Wiley-Blackwell, New York), 352–406.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
• Zahra SA, Nielsen AP (2002) Sources of capabilities, integration and technology commercialization. Strategic Management J. 23(5):377–398.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zirger BJ, Maidique MA (1990) A model of new product development: An empirical test. Management Sci. 36(2):867–881.Link, Google Scholar
• Zollo M, Reuer JJ (2010) Experience spillovers across corporate development activities. Organ. Sci. 21(6):1195–1212.Link, Google Scholar