IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v47y2018i9p1674-1687.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Functional centrality and innovation intensity: Employee-level analysis of the Telenor group

Author

Listed:
  • Castellacci, Fulvio
  • Gulbrandsen, Magnus
  • Hildrum, Jarle
  • Martinkenaite, Ieva
  • Simensen, Erlend

Abstract

Recent research on employee-level innovation focuses on scientists’ ability to source advanced knowledge and use it to create new ideas and innovation within a firm. The present paper introduces a new dimension to this literature: functional departments. We argue that functional centrality, namely the extent to which a functional department is central in the intra-organizational network, affects employees’ innovation intensity. We make use of a rich novel dataset at the employee-level for the Telenor Group, based on a large-scale survey among nearly 16,000 employees in all business units and functions of the company. The empirical results point out that employees’ innovation intensity is higher in departments that are centrally positioned in the company’s internal network. Task characteristics such as quality orientation, entrepreneurial attitude and result pressure moderate the relationship between centrality and innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Castellacci, Fulvio & Gulbrandsen, Magnus & Hildrum, Jarle & Martinkenaite, Ieva & Simensen, Erlend, 2018. "Functional centrality and innovation intensity: Employee-level analysis of the Telenor group," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1674-1687.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:9:p:1674-1687
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2018.06.004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733318301495
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2018.06.004?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Craig Crossland & Donald C. Hambrick, 2007. "How national systems differ in their constraints on corporate executives: a study of CEO effects in three countries," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(8), pages 767-789, August.
    2. Paola Criscuolo & Ammon Salter & Anne L. J. Ter Wal, 2014. "Going Underground: Bootlegging and Individual Innovative Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(5), pages 1287-1305, October.
    3. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1993. "Knowledge of the Firm and the Evolutionary Theory of the Multinational Corporation," Journal of International Business Studies, Palgrave Macmillan;Academy of International Business, vol. 24(4), pages 625-645, December.
    4. Isin Guler & Atul Nerkar, 2012. "The impact of global and local cohesion on innovation in the pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5), pages 535-549, May.
    5. Richard F. J. Haans & Constant Pieters & Zi-Lin He, 2016. "Thinking about U: Theorizing and testing U- and inverted U-shaped relationships in strategy research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(7), pages 1177-1195, July.
    6. Jansen, J.J.P. & van den Bosch, F.A.J. & Volberda, H.W., 2005. "Managing Potential and Realized Absorptive Capacity: How do Organizational Antecedents matter?," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-025-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    7. Cuijpers, Maarten & Guenter, Hannes & Hussinger, Katrin, 2011. "Costs and benefits of inter-departmental innovation collaboration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 565-575, May.
    8. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    9. Srikanth Paruchuri & Snehal Awate, 2017. "Organizational knowledge networks and local search: The role of intra‐organizational inventor networks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 657-675, March.
    10. Marco Tortoriello, 2015. "The social underpinnings of absorptive capacity: The moderating effects of structural holes on innovation generation based on external knowledge," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(4), pages 586-597, April.
    11. Linus Dahlander & Siobhan O'Mahony & David M. Gann, 2016. "One foot in, one foot out: how does individuals' external search breadth affect innovation outcomes?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(2), pages 280-302, February.
    12. Nicolai J. Foss & Keld Laursen & Torben Pedersen, 2011. "Linking Customer Interaction and Innovation: The Mediating Role of New Organizational Practices," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 980-999, August.
    13. Nicholas S. Argyres & Brian S. Silverman, 2004. "R&D, organization structure, and the development of corporate technological knowledge," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 929-958, August.
    14. Keld Laursen, 2012. "Keep searching and you'll find: what do we know about variety creation through firms' search activities for innovation?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 21(5), pages 1181-1220, October.
    15. Maggitti, Patrick G. & Smith, Ken G. & Katila, Riitta, 2013. "The complex search process of invention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 90-100.
    16. Bogers, Marcel & Foss, Nicolai J. & Lyngsie, Jacob, 2018. "The “human side” of open innovation: The role of employee diversity in firm-level openness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 218-231.
    17. Marc Gruber & Dietmar Harhoff & Karin Hoisl, 2013. "Knowledge Recombination Across Technological Boundaries: Scientists vs. Engineers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(4), pages 837-851, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Marte C.W. Solheim & Ron Boschma & Sverre Herstad, 2018. "Related variety, unrelated variety and the novelty content of firm innovation in urban and non-urban locations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1836, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2018.
    2. Solheim, Marte C.W. & Boschma, Ron & Herstad, Sverre J., 2020. "Collected worker experiences and the novelty content of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    3. Wang, Shixun & Yang, Lihong, 2022. "Spatial competition, strategic R&D and the structure of innovation networks," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 13-31.
    4. Hongli Lin & Yuming Zhu & Jiahe Zhou & Bingxu Mu & Caihong Liu, 2022. "Stakeholder Engagement Behavior(s) in Sustainable Brownfield Regeneration: A Network Embeddedness Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-21, May.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jiao, Hao & Wang, Tang & Yang, Jifeng, 2022. "Team structure and invention impact under high knowledge diversity: An empirical examination of computer workstation industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    2. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    3. Brennecke, Julia & Sofka, Wolfgang & Wang, Peng & Rank, Olaf N., 2021. "How the organizational design of R&D units affects individual search intensity – A network study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(5).
    4. Ter Wal, Anne L.J. & Criscuolo, Paola & Salter, Ammon, 2017. "Making a marriage of materials: The role of gatekeepers and shepherds in the absorption of external knowledge and innovation performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(5), pages 1039-1054.
    5. Samuel C MacAulay & John Steen & Tim Kastelle, 2020. "The search environment is not (always) benign: reassessing the risks of organizational search," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(1), pages 1-23.
    6. Luca Berchicci & Nilanjana Dutt & Will Mitchell, 2019. "Knowledge Sources and Operational Problems: Less Now, More Later," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 1030-1053, September.
    7. Simona Gentile-Lüdecke & Rui Torres de Oliveira & Justin Paul, 2020. "Does organizational structure facilitate inbound and outbound open innovation in SMEs?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(4), pages 1091-1112, December.
    8. Marte C.W. Solheim & Ron Boschma & Sverre Herstad, 2018. "Related variety, unrelated variety and the novelty content of firm innovation in urban and non-urban locations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1836, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2018.
    9. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2017. "Breadth of external knowledge sourcing and product innovation: The moderating role of strategic human resource practices," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 261-272.
    10. Hoppmann, Joern & Wu, Geng & Johnson, Jillian, 2021. "The impact of demand-pull and technology-push policies on firms’ knowledge search," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    11. Rajat Khanna & Isin Guler, 2022. "Degree assortativity in collaboration networks and invention performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(7), pages 1402-1430, July.
    12. Turanay Caner & Susan K. Cohen & Frits Pil, 2017. "Firm heterogeneity in complex problem solving: A knowledge-based look at invention," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(9), pages 1791-1811, September.
    13. Johann Piet Hausberg & Peter S. H. Leeflang, 2019. "Absorbing Integration: Empirical Evidence On The Mediating Role Of Absorptive Capacity Between Functional-/Cross-Functional Integration And Innovation Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(06), pages 1-37, August.
    14. Lívia Lopes Barakat & Torben Pedersen & Marcio Amaral-Baptista & Sherban Leornardo Cretoiu & Paulo Bento, 2022. "Too Much of Two Good Things: Explicating the Limited Complementarity Between Drivers of MNC Headquarters’ Absorptive Capacity," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 62(3), pages 393-426, June.
    15. Jiang, Lin & Clark, Brent B. & Turban, Daniel B., 2023. "Overcoming the challenge of exploration: How decompartmentalization of internal communication enhances the effect of exploration on employee inventive performance," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    16. Yuosre F. Badir & Björn Frank & Marcel Bogers, 2020. "Employee-level open innovation in emerging markets: linking internal, external, and managerial resources," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 891-913, September.
    17. Vivek Tandon & Puay Khoon Toh, 2022. "Who deviates? Technological opportunities, career concern, and inventor's distant search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(4), pages 724-757, April.
    18. El Maalouf, Nicole & Bahemia, Hanna, 2023. "The implementation of inbound open innovation at the firm level: A dynamic capability perspective," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    19. Cirillo, Bruno & Breschi, Stefano & Prencipe, Andrea, 2018. "Divide to connect: Reorganization through R&D unit spinout as linking context of intra-corporate networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1585-1600.
    20. Shafique, Muhammad & Hagedoorn, John, 2022. "Look at U: Technological scope of the acquirer, technological complementarity with the target, and post-acquisition R&D output," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Employee-level innovation; Innovation search; Functional departments; Functional centrality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L20 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:47:y:2018:i:9:p:1674-1687. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.