IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v54y2025i7s0048733325001003.html

Autonomous inventions, problem formulation, and inventive outcomes

Author

Listed:
  • Yang, Jiho
  • Criscuolo, Paola
  • Sharapov, Dmitry

Abstract

Prior research on creativity by R&D teams has highlighted that autonomy in deciding how to solve a given problem (operational autonomy) positively influences creativity. However, R&D teams may also have autonomy in choosing which problems to address (strategic autonomy), the effects of which remain underexplored. This study examines how strategic autonomy influences the cognitive process of problem representation and in turn, the creativity of inventions produced by R&D teams. Leveraging a unique dataset consisting of descriptions of problems in invention disclosures by R&D professionals of a firm, along with information on whether an invention was autonomously initiated, we find that problem representation complexity is lower for autonomous inventions, or inventions for which R&D teams exert strategic autonomy to identify problems themselves, than top-down inventions for which problems are identified and assigned to them by managers. We further find that domain expertise and multi-project engagement of team members moderate this relationship, and that lower problem representation complexity in turn relates to lower creativity of inventions. By uncovering a novel mechanism through which autonomy negatively affects creativity, this study contributes to the literatures on creativity, innovation, and organizational design.

Suggested Citation

  • Yang, Jiho & Criscuolo, Paola & Sharapov, Dmitry, 2025. "Autonomous inventions, problem formulation, and inventive outcomes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(7).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:7:s0048733325001003
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2025.105271
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733325001003
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2025.105271?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paola Criscuolo & Oliver Alexy & Dmitry Sharapov & Ammon Salter, 2019. "Lifting the veil: Using a quasi‐replication approach to assess sample selection bias in patent‐based studies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(2), pages 230-252, February.
    2. Markus Baer & Kurt T. Dirks & Jackson A. Nickerson, 2013. "Microfoundations of strategic problem formulation†," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(2), pages 197-214, February.
    3. John Paul MacDuffie, 1997. "The Road to "Root Cause": Shop-Floor Problem-Solving at Three Auto Assembly Plants," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 479-502, April.
    4. Alfonso Gambardella & Pooyan Khashabi & Claudio Panico, 2020. "Managing Autonomy in Industrial Research and Development: A Project-Level Investigation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(1), pages 165-181, January.
    5. John Joseph & Vibha Gaba, 2015. "The fog of feedback: Ambiguity and firm responses to multiple aspiration levels," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(13), pages 1960-1978, December.
    6. Liu, Dong & Jiang, Kaifeng & Shalley, Christina E. & Keem, Sejin & Zhou, Jing, 2016. "Motivational mechanisms of employee creativity: A meta-analytic examination and theoretical extension of the creativity literature," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 236-263.
    7. Arts, Sam & Hou, Jianan & Gomez, Juan Carlos, 2021. "Natural language processing to identify the creation and impact of new technologies in patent text: Code, data, and new measures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(2).
    8. William Ocasio, 2011. "Attention to Attention," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1286-1296, October.
    9. Felin, Teppo & Zenger, Todd R., 2014. "Closed or open innovation? Problem solving and the governance choice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 914-925.
    10. Alfonso Gambardella & Claudio Panico & Giovanni Valentini, 2015. "Strategic incentives to human capital," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 37-52, January.
    11. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    12. Gerald F. Smith, 1989. "Defining Managerial Problems: A Framework for Prescriptive Theorizing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 35(8), pages 963-981, August.
    13. Sucheta Nadkarni & V. K. Narayanan, 2007. "Strategic schemas, strategic flexibility, and firm performance: the moderating role of industry clockspeed," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(3), pages 243-270, March.
    14. David V. Day & Robert G. Lord, 1992. "Expertise And Problem Categorization: The Role Of Expert Processing In Organizational Sense‐Making," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 35-47, January.
    15. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    16. Nilanjana Dutt & Will Mitchell, 2020. "Searching for knowledge in response to proximate and remote problem sources: Evidence from the U.S. renewable electricity industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 1412-1449, August.
    17. Basadur, M & Ellspermann, SJ & Evans, GW, 1994. "A new methodology for formulating ill-structured problems," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 22(6), pages 627-645, November.
    18. Simon J. D. Schillebeeckx & Yimin Lin & Gerard George, 2019. "When Do Expert Teams Fail to Create Impactful Inventions?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(6), pages 1073-1104, September.
    19. Scott Shane, 2000. "Prior Knowledge and the Discovery of Entrepreneurial Opportunities," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 448-469, August.
    20. Wang, Pengfei & Van De Vrande, Vareska & Jansen, Justin J.P., 2017. "Balancing exploration and exploitation in inventions: Quality of inventions and team composition," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1836-1850.
    21. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    22. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    23. Giuri, Paola & Mariani, Myriam, 2007. "Inventors and invention processes in Europe: Results from the PatVal-EU survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1105-1106, October.
    24. Paulo B. Goes & Noyan Ilk & Mingfeng Lin & J. Leon Zhao, 2018. "When More Is Less: Field Evidence on Unintended Consequences of Multitasking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3033-3054, July.
    25. Lopez-Vega, Henry & Tell, Fredrik & Vanhaverbeke, Wim, 2016. "Where and how to search? Search paths in open innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 125-136.
    26. Betty Vandenbosch & Chris Higgins, 1996. "Information Acquisition and Mental Models: An Investigation into the Relationship Between Behaviour and Learning," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 7(2), pages 198-214, June.
    27. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Myriam Mariani, 2014. "Learning to Be Edison: Inventors, Organizations, and Breakthrough Inventions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 833-849, June.
    28. Dirk Martignoni & Anoop Menon & Nicolaj Siggelkow, 2016. "Consequences of misspecified mental models: Contrasting effects and the role of cognitive fit," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(13), pages 2545-2568, December.
    29. Chan Hyung Park & Markus Baer, 2022. "Getting to the Root of Things: The Role of Epistemic Motivation and Construal Levels in Strategic Problem Formulation," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 284-299, December.
    30. Denis A. Grégoire & Pamela S. Barr & Dean A. Shepherd, 2010. "Cognitive Processes of Opportunity Recognition: The Role of Structural Alignment," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(2), pages 413-431, April.
    31. Diwas Singh KC, 2014. "Does Multitasking Improve Performance? Evidence from the Emergency Department," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 16(2), pages 168-183, May.
    32. Yuchen Zhang & Wei Yang, 2022. "Breakthrough invention and problem complexity: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2510-2544, December.
    33. Pino G. Audia & Jack A. Goncalo, 2007. "Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-15, January.
    34. Ganco, Martin, 2017. "NK model as a representation of innovative search," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(10), pages 1783-1800.
    35. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    36. Leroy, Sophie, 2009. "Why is it so hard to do my work? The challenge of attention residue when switching between work tasks," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 109(2), pages 168-181, July.
    37. Felipe A. Csaszar & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2016. "Mental representation and the discovery of new strategies," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(10), pages 2031-2049, October.
    38. Daniella Laureiro-Martinez & Jose Pablo Arrieta & Stefano Brusoni, 2023. "Microfoundations of Problem Solving: Attentional Engagement Predicts Problem-Solving Strategies," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(6), pages 2207-2230, November.
    39. Melero, Eduardo & Palomeras, Neus, 2015. "The Renaissance Man is not dead! The role of generalists in teams of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 154-167.
    40. Roger J. Volkema, 1983. "Problem Formulation in Planning and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 639-652, June.
    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. Yuchen Zhang & Wei Yang, 2022. "Breakthrough invention and problem complexity: Evidence from a quasi‐experiment," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2510-2544, December.
    2. Kafouros, Mario & Mavroudi, Eva & Aliyev, Murod & Hong, Junjie, 2025. "Technological complexity and the creation of impactful technologies: The role of inventors' international diversity and expertise," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3).
    3. Sam Arts & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Paradise of Novelty—Or Loss of Human Capital? Exploring New Fields and Inventive Output," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    4. Madeline K. Kneeland & Melissa A. Schilling & Barak S. Aharonson, 2020. "Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 535-557, May.
    5. 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).
    6. Yan, Hong-Bin & Li, Ming, 2022. "Consumer demand based recombinant search for idea generation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    7. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    8. 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).
    9. Qu, Guannan & Chen, Jin & Zhang, Ruhao & Wang, Luyao & Yang, Yayu, 2023. "Technological search strategy and breakthrough innovation: An integrated approach based on main-path analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    10. Lee, Kyung Yul & Jung, Hyun Ju & Kwon, Youngsun, 2024. "Boundary-spanning technology search, product component reuse, and new product innovation: Evidence from the smartphone industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(4).
    11. John-Paul Ferguson & Gianluca Carnabuci, 2017. "Risky Recombinations: Institutional Gatekeeping in the Innovation Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 133-151, February.
    12. Hou, Tianyu & Zhang, Liang & Li, Julie Juan & Chong, Bin & Wu, Yanzi, 2024. "The quest for valuable inventions: Knowledge search and the value of patented inventions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    13. Jeongsik “Jay” Lee & Hyun Ju Jung & Hyunwoo Park, 2023. "Rare is beautiful? Rareness, technology value, and the moderating role of search domain and knowledge maturity," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(4), pages 1019-1040, April.
    14. Shinjinee Chattopadhyay & Janet Bercovitz, 2020. "When one door closes, another door opens … for some: Evidence from the post‐TRIPS Indian pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 988-1022, June.
    15. Joel O. Wooten, 2022. "Leaps in innovation and the Bannister effect in contests," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(6), pages 2646-2663, June.
    16. Boeker, Warren & Howard, Michael D. & Basu, Sandip & Sahaym, Arvin, 2021. "Interpersonal relationships, digital technologies, and innovation in entrepreneurial ventures," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 495-507.
    17. Lorenzo Ardito & Roger Svensson, 2024. "Sourcing applied and basic knowledge for innovation and commercialization success," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(3), pages 959-995, June.
    18. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    19. David H. Hsu & Kwanghui Lim, 2014. "Knowledge Brokering and Organizational Innovation: Founder Imprinting Effects," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(4), pages 1134-1153, August.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:54:y:2025:i:7:s0048733325001003. 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.