IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wsi/ijimxx/v20y2016i02ns1363919616500183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Motivation Fatigue As A Threat To Innovation: Bypassing The Productivity Dilemma In R&D By Cyclic Production

Author

Listed:
  • JAN MATTSSON

    (Roskilde University, Universitetsvej 1, 4000 Roskilde, Denmark2School of Business, Edith Cowan University, 270 Joondalup Drive, Joondalup WA 6027, Australia)

  • HELGE HELMERSSON

    (Department of Business Administration, Lund University, Lund, Sweden)

  • KATARINA STETLER

    (KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

What do employees need in order to be innovative? In this paper, we explored how employees with different lengths of tenure within the research and development (R&D) department of a company in the automotive industry answer this question. We found that the needs vary depending on the length of the employee’s tenure. New employees view innovation as an organisational work issue and employees with longer tenure seek the support of management in changing the work situation themselves in a way that will enhance innovation. In contrast, employees who have been with the company over 10 years show signs of resignation and blame management for the problems around innovation that they experience. However, one opinion that all groups of different tenures share is that there is not enough time to engage in innovation activities. To address some of these different needs, we suggest viewing productivity as a cycle of two outcomes: product information and knowledge creation. When one is low, the other peaks, and vice versa. This view of dual value creation in R&D is one way to bypass the productivity dilemma.

Suggested Citation

  • Jan Mattsson & Helge Helmersson & Katarina Stetler, 2016. "Motivation Fatigue As A Threat To Innovation: Bypassing The Productivity Dilemma In R&D By Cyclic Production," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-23, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:wsi:ijimxx:v:20:y:2016:i:02:n:s1363919616500183
    DOI: 10.1142/S1363919616500183
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.worldscientific.com/doi/abs/10.1142/S1363919616500183
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1142/S1363919616500183?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. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    2. Carl Roberts & Cornelia Zuell & Juliane Landmann & Yong Wang, 2010. "Modality analysis: a semantic grammar for imputations of intentionality in texts," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 239-257, February.
    3. Robinson, Richard N.S. & Beesley, Lisa G., 2010. "Linkages between creativity and intention to quit: An occupational study of chefs," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 765-776.
    4. Nohria, Nitin & Gulati, Ranjay, 1997. "What is the optimum amount of organizational slack? : A study of the relationship between slack and innovation in multinational firms," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 603-611, December.
    5. Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 590-607, May.
    6. Burgelman, Robert A., 2002. "Strategy as Vector and the Inertia of Co-evolutionary Lock-in," Research Papers 1745, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    7. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    8. Daniel A. Levinthal & James G. March, 1993. "The myopia of learning," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 14(S2), pages 95-112, December.
    9. Blatter, Marc & Muehlemann, Samuel & Schenker, Samuel, 2012. "The costs of hiring skilled workers," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 20-35.
    10. Wendy K. Smith & Michael L. Tushman, 2005. "Managing Strategic Contradictions: A Top Management Model for Managing Innovation Streams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(5), pages 522-536, October.
    11. Cooper, Robert G., 1990. "Stage-gate systems: A new tool for managing new products," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 44-54.
    12. Mary M. Crossan & Marina Apaydin, 2010. "A Multi‐Dimensional Framework of Organizational Innovation: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(6), pages 1154-1191, September.
    13. Van de Ven, Andrew R., 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Agricultural Research Policy Seminar 139708, University of Minnesota Extension.
    14. Hauser, John & Katz, Gerald, 1998. "Metrics: you are what you measure!," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 517-528, October.
    15. Hauser, John R. & Katz, Gerald M. & International Center for Research on the Management of Technology., 1998. "Metrics : you are what you measure!," Working papers 172-98, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Lin, H.E., 2010. "Effects of strategy, context and antecedents and capabilities on the outcomes of ambidexterity : A multiple country case study of the US, China and Taiwan," Other publications TiSEM c0eab7d6-d6c7-4b55-9822-1, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    2. Brion, Sébastien & Mothe, Caroline & Sabatier, Mareva, 2007. "What impacts more on innovation : Organizational context or individual competences ?," MPRA Paper 10595, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Sébastien Brion & Caroline Mothe & Maréva Sabatier, 2010. "The Impact Of Organisational Context And Competences On Innovation Ambidexterity," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 14(02), pages 151-178.
    4. Karl Aschenbrücker & Tobias Kretschmer, 2022. "Performance-based incentives and innovative activity in small firms: evidence from German manufacturing," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 11(2), pages 47-64, June.
    5. Onexy Quintana-Martinez & Antonio-Rafael Ramos-Rodriguez, 2016. "Changes in the Axes of Convergence of Innovation Management Research," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 11(5), pages 1-96, April.
    6. Yu-Shan Su & Eric Tsang & Mike Peng, 2009. "How do internal capabilities and external partnerships affect innovativeness?," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 309-331, June.
    7. Sabyasachi Sinha, 2015. "The Exploration–Exploitation Dilemma: A Review in the Context of Managing Growth of New Ventures," Vikalpa: The Journal for Decision Makers, , vol. 40(3), pages 313-323, September.
    8. Christel Lane & Daniela Lup, 2015. "Cooking under Fire: Managing Multilevel Tensions between Creativity and Innovation in Haute Cuisine," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(8), pages 654-676, November.
    9. Jiewei Zu & Jianan Wang & Jun Ma, 2022. "Ambidexterity in a Rapidly Changing Environment of China: Top Management Team Decision Making and Sustained Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Justin J. P. Jansen & Michiel P. Tempelaar & Frans A. J. van den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2009. "Structural Differentiation and Ambidexterity: The Mediating Role of Integration Mechanisms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(4), pages 797-811, August.
    11. Koryak, Oksana & Lockett, Andy & Hayton, James & Nicolaou, Nicos & Mole, Kevin, 2018. "Disentangling the antecedents of ambidexterity: Exploration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 413-427.
    12. Ewelina Zarzycka & Justyna Dobroszek & Lauri Lepistö & Sinikka Moilanen, 2019. "Coexistence of innovation and standardization: evidence from the lean environment of business process outsourcing," Journal of Management Control: Zeitschrift für Planung und Unternehmenssteuerung, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 251-286, October.
    13. Turner, Karynne L. & Monti, Alberto & Annosi, Maria Carmela, 2021. "Disentangling the effects of organizational controls on innovation," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 57-69.
    14. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    15. Uriel Stettner & Dovev Lavie, 2014. "Ambidexterity under scrutiny: Exploration and exploitation via internal organization, alliances, and acquisitions," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(13), pages 1903-1929, December.
    16. Matthew J. Mazzei & David J. Ketchen & Christopher L. Shook, 2017. "Understanding strategic entrepreneurship: a “theoretical toolbox” approach," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 13(2), pages 631-663, June.
    17. Burgers, J. Henri & Jansen, Justin J.P. & Van den Bosch, Frans A.J. & Volberda, Henk W., 2009. "Structural differentiation and corporate venturing: The moderating role of formal and informal integration mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 206-220, May.
    18. Yasser Alizadeh & Antonie J. Jetter, 2019. "Pathways for Balancing Exploration and Exploitation in Innovations: A Review and Expansion of Ambidexterity Theory," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(05), pages 1-33, August.
    19. Casanueva, Cristóbal & Castro, Ignacio & Galán, José L., 2013. "Informational networks and innovation in mature industrial clusters," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(5), pages 603-613.
    20. Rachel Bocquet & Sandra Dubouloz, 2020. "Firm Openness and Managerial Innovation: Rebalancing Deliberate Actions and Institutional Pressures," Journal of Innovation Economics, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(2), pages 43-74.

    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:wsi:ijimxx:v:20:y:2016:i:02:n:s1363919616500183. 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: Tai Tone Lim (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.worldscinet.com/ijim/ijim.shtml .

    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.