Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects
Building on a unique, multi-source, and multi-method study of R&D projects in a leading professional services firm, we develop the argument that organizations are more likely to fund projects with intermediate levels of novelty. That is, some project novelty increases the share of requested fund...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Academy of Management journal 2017-04, Vol.60 (2), p.433-460 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 460 |
---|---|
container_issue | 2 |
container_start_page | 433 |
container_title | Academy of Management journal |
container_volume | 60 |
creator | Criscuolo, Paola Dahlander, Linus Grohsjean, Thorsten Salter, Ammon |
description | Building on a unique, multi-source, and multi-method study of R&D projects in a leading professional services firm, we develop the argument that organizations are more likely to fund projects with intermediate levels of novelty. That is, some project novelty increases the share of requested funds received, but too much novelty is difficult to appreciate and is selected against. While prior research has considered the characteristics of the individuals generating project ideas, we shift the focus to the panel of selectors and explore how they shape the evaluation of novelty. We theorize that a high panel workload reduces panel preference for novelty in selection, whereas a diversity of panel expertise and a shared location between panel and applicant increase preference for novelty. We explore the implications of these findings for theories of innovation search, organizational selection, and managerial practice. |
doi_str_mv | 10.5465/amj.2014.0861 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1905750098</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1905750098</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-de159c3eb27ecc55a8e7ae87a74a6992e60347c27be3c6e5cbca851c527aaab33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotkM1LAzEQxYMoWKtH7wHB29Z8bhJvorUKRUut55CNU91lu6nJttD_3iz1NMx7jxneD6FrSiZSlPLObZoJI1RMiC7pCRpRI3RBjDanaEQIoYVgip-ji5SavGbTjNBsunftzvV1943fwh7a_nCPVz-Al6EFHNZ44TpoE6473Gf1A1rwfR26wVrePuFFDE1W0iU6W7s2wdX_HKPP5-nq8aWYv89eHx_mhRdM9MUXUGk8h4op8F5Kp0E50Mop4UpjGJSEC-WZqoD7EqSvvNOSesmUc67ifIxujne3MfzuIPW2CbvY5ZeWGiKVzMV0ThXHlI8hpQhru431xsWDpcQOrGxmZQdWdmDF_wBqxlvA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1905750098</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects</title><source>Business Source Complete</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Criscuolo, Paola ; Dahlander, Linus ; Grohsjean, Thorsten ; Salter, Ammon</creator><creatorcontrib>Criscuolo, Paola ; Dahlander, Linus ; Grohsjean, Thorsten ; Salter, Ammon</creatorcontrib><description>Building on a unique, multi-source, and multi-method study of R&D projects in a leading professional services firm, we develop the argument that organizations are more likely to fund projects with intermediate levels of novelty. That is, some project novelty increases the share of requested funds received, but too much novelty is difficult to appreciate and is selected against. While prior research has considered the characteristics of the individuals generating project ideas, we shift the focus to the panel of selectors and explore how they shape the evaluation of novelty. We theorize that a high panel workload reduces panel preference for novelty in selection, whereas a diversity of panel expertise and a shared location between panel and applicant increase preference for novelty. We explore the implications of these findings for theories of innovation search, organizational selection, and managerial practice.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0001-4273</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1948-0989</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5465/amj.2014.0861</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Briarcliff Manor: Academy of Management</publisher><subject>Experts ; Innovations ; Mixed methods research ; Organizational behavior ; R&D ; Research & development ; Studies</subject><ispartof>Academy of Management journal, 2017-04, Vol.60 (2), p.433-460</ispartof><rights>Copyright Academy of Management Apr 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-de159c3eb27ecc55a8e7ae87a74a6992e60347c27be3c6e5cbca851c527aaab33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-de159c3eb27ecc55a8e7ae87a74a6992e60347c27be3c6e5cbca851c527aaab33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Criscuolo, Paola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dahlander, Linus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grohsjean, Thorsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salter, Ammon</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects</title><title>Academy of Management journal</title><description>Building on a unique, multi-source, and multi-method study of R&D projects in a leading professional services firm, we develop the argument that organizations are more likely to fund projects with intermediate levels of novelty. That is, some project novelty increases the share of requested funds received, but too much novelty is difficult to appreciate and is selected against. While prior research has considered the characteristics of the individuals generating project ideas, we shift the focus to the panel of selectors and explore how they shape the evaluation of novelty. We theorize that a high panel workload reduces panel preference for novelty in selection, whereas a diversity of panel expertise and a shared location between panel and applicant increase preference for novelty. We explore the implications of these findings for theories of innovation search, organizational selection, and managerial practice.</description><subject>Experts</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>Mixed methods research</subject><subject>Organizational behavior</subject><subject>R&D</subject><subject>Research & development</subject><subject>Studies</subject><issn>0001-4273</issn><issn>1948-0989</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNotkM1LAzEQxYMoWKtH7wHB29Z8bhJvorUKRUut55CNU91lu6nJttD_3iz1NMx7jxneD6FrSiZSlPLObZoJI1RMiC7pCRpRI3RBjDanaEQIoYVgip-ji5SavGbTjNBsunftzvV1943fwh7a_nCPVz-Al6EFHNZ44TpoE6473Gf1A1rwfR26wVrePuFFDE1W0iU6W7s2wdX_HKPP5-nq8aWYv89eHx_mhRdM9MUXUGk8h4op8F5Kp0E50Mop4UpjGJSEC-WZqoD7EqSvvNOSesmUc67ifIxujne3MfzuIPW2CbvY5ZeWGiKVzMV0ThXHlI8hpQhru431xsWDpcQOrGxmZQdWdmDF_wBqxlvA</recordid><startdate>201704</startdate><enddate>201704</enddate><creator>Criscuolo, Paola</creator><creator>Dahlander, Linus</creator><creator>Grohsjean, Thorsten</creator><creator>Salter, Ammon</creator><general>Academy of Management</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K9.</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201704</creationdate><title>Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects</title><author>Criscuolo, Paola ; Dahlander, Linus ; Grohsjean, Thorsten ; Salter, Ammon</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c424t-de159c3eb27ecc55a8e7ae87a74a6992e60347c27be3c6e5cbca851c527aaab33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Experts</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>Mixed methods research</topic><topic>Organizational behavior</topic><topic>R&D</topic><topic>Research & development</topic><topic>Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Criscuolo, Paola</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dahlander, Linus</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Grohsjean, Thorsten</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Salter, Ammon</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><jtitle>Academy of Management journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Criscuolo, Paola</au><au>Dahlander, Linus</au><au>Grohsjean, Thorsten</au><au>Salter, Ammon</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects</atitle><jtitle>Academy of Management journal</jtitle><date>2017-04</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>60</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>433</spage><epage>460</epage><pages>433-460</pages><issn>0001-4273</issn><eissn>1948-0989</eissn><abstract>Building on a unique, multi-source, and multi-method study of R&D projects in a leading professional services firm, we develop the argument that organizations are more likely to fund projects with intermediate levels of novelty. That is, some project novelty increases the share of requested funds received, but too much novelty is difficult to appreciate and is selected against. While prior research has considered the characteristics of the individuals generating project ideas, we shift the focus to the panel of selectors and explore how they shape the evaluation of novelty. We theorize that a high panel workload reduces panel preference for novelty in selection, whereas a diversity of panel expertise and a shared location between panel and applicant increase preference for novelty. We explore the implications of these findings for theories of innovation search, organizational selection, and managerial practice.</abstract><cop>Briarcliff Manor</cop><pub>Academy of Management</pub><doi>10.5465/amj.2014.0861</doi><tpages>28</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0001-4273 |
ispartof | Academy of Management journal, 2017-04, Vol.60 (2), p.433-460 |
issn | 0001-4273 1948-0989 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1905750098 |
source | Business Source Complete; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Experts Innovations Mixed methods research Organizational behavior R&D Research & development Studies |
title | Evaluating Novelty: The Role of Panels in the Selection of R&D Projects |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-16T02%3A14%3A17IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluating%20Novelty:%20The%20Role%20of%20Panels%20in%20the%20Selection%20of%20R&D%20Projects&rft.jtitle=Academy%20of%20Management%20journal&rft.au=Criscuolo,%20Paola&rft.date=2017-04&rft.volume=60&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=433&rft.epage=460&rft.pages=433-460&rft.issn=0001-4273&rft.eissn=1948-0989&rft_id=info:doi/10.5465/amj.2014.0861&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1905750098%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1905750098&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |