Structural ambidexterity in NPD processes; A firm-level assessment of the impact of differentiated structures on innovation performance

Matthias de Visser, Petronella C. de Weerd-Nederhof, D.L.M. Faems, Michael Song, Michael Song, Bart van Looy, Bart van Looy, Klaasjan Visscher

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

71 Citations (Scopus)
368 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Based on a survey study of 155 U.S. firms, we conducted a firm-level assessment of the impact of different kinds of structures (i.e., functional versus cross-functional) in different kinds of new product development (NPD) processes (i.e., incremental versus radical) on different kinds of firm innovation performance (i.e., derivative versus breakthrough). We observe that most firms opt for similar structures for their incremental and radical NPD processes. At the same time, though, we find strong evidence that (1) firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the radical NPD process perform significantly better in terms of breakthrough innovation performance than firms that apply a functional structure for the radical NPD process and (2) firms that apply a functional structure for the incremental NPD process perform significantly better in terms of derivative innovation performance than firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the incremental NPD process. These latter findings point to the relevance of adopting structural ambidexterity, where firms make an explicit distinction between incremental and radical NPD processes and organize them in a different way.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)291-299
JournalTechnovation
Volume30
Issue number5-6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2010

Fingerprint

Product development
Innovation
Derivatives
Ambidexterity
Innovation performance
New product development process
Incremental

Keywords

  • Cross-functional structure
  • Breakthrough innovation performance
  • Derivative innovation performance
  • IR-78334
  • New product development process
  • Structural ambidexterity
  • METIS-268233

Cite this

@article{de0b6cc567324e4dbc9d85e3d8d7f34b,
title = "Structural ambidexterity in NPD processes; A firm-level assessment of the impact of differentiated structures on innovation performance",
abstract = "Based on a survey study of 155 U.S. firms, we conducted a firm-level assessment of the impact of different kinds of structures (i.e., functional versus cross-functional) in different kinds of new product development (NPD) processes (i.e., incremental versus radical) on different kinds of firm innovation performance (i.e., derivative versus breakthrough). We observe that most firms opt for similar structures for their incremental and radical NPD processes. At the same time, though, we find strong evidence that (1) firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the radical NPD process perform significantly better in terms of breakthrough innovation performance than firms that apply a functional structure for the radical NPD process and (2) firms that apply a functional structure for the incremental NPD process perform significantly better in terms of derivative innovation performance than firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the incremental NPD process. These latter findings point to the relevance of adopting structural ambidexterity, where firms make an explicit distinction between incremental and radical NPD processes and organize them in a different way.",
keywords = "Cross-functional structure, Breakthrough innovation performance, Derivative innovation performance, IR-78334, New product development process, Structural ambidexterity, METIS-268233",
author = "{de Visser}, Matthias and {de Weerd-Nederhof}, {Petronella C.} and D.L.M. Faems and Michael Song and Michael Song and {van Looy}, Bart and {van Looy}, Bart and Klaasjan Visscher",
year = "2010",
doi = "10.1016/j.technovation.2009.09.008",
language = "English",
volume = "30",
pages = "291--299",
journal = "Technovation",
issn = "0166-4972",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "5-6",

}

Structural ambidexterity in NPD processes; A firm-level assessment of the impact of differentiated structures on innovation performance. / de Visser, Matthias; de Weerd-Nederhof, Petronella C.; Faems, D.L.M.; Song, Michael; Song, Michael; van Looy, Bart; van Looy, Bart; Visscher, Klaasjan.

In: Technovation, Vol. 30, No. 5-6, 2010, p. 291-299.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Structural ambidexterity in NPD processes; A firm-level assessment of the impact of differentiated structures on innovation performance

AU - de Visser, Matthias

AU - de Weerd-Nederhof, Petronella C.

AU - Faems, D.L.M.

AU - Song, Michael

AU - Song, Michael

AU - van Looy, Bart

AU - van Looy, Bart

AU - Visscher, Klaasjan

PY - 2010

Y1 - 2010

N2 - Based on a survey study of 155 U.S. firms, we conducted a firm-level assessment of the impact of different kinds of structures (i.e., functional versus cross-functional) in different kinds of new product development (NPD) processes (i.e., incremental versus radical) on different kinds of firm innovation performance (i.e., derivative versus breakthrough). We observe that most firms opt for similar structures for their incremental and radical NPD processes. At the same time, though, we find strong evidence that (1) firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the radical NPD process perform significantly better in terms of breakthrough innovation performance than firms that apply a functional structure for the radical NPD process and (2) firms that apply a functional structure for the incremental NPD process perform significantly better in terms of derivative innovation performance than firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the incremental NPD process. These latter findings point to the relevance of adopting structural ambidexterity, where firms make an explicit distinction between incremental and radical NPD processes and organize them in a different way.

AB - Based on a survey study of 155 U.S. firms, we conducted a firm-level assessment of the impact of different kinds of structures (i.e., functional versus cross-functional) in different kinds of new product development (NPD) processes (i.e., incremental versus radical) on different kinds of firm innovation performance (i.e., derivative versus breakthrough). We observe that most firms opt for similar structures for their incremental and radical NPD processes. At the same time, though, we find strong evidence that (1) firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the radical NPD process perform significantly better in terms of breakthrough innovation performance than firms that apply a functional structure for the radical NPD process and (2) firms that apply a functional structure for the incremental NPD process perform significantly better in terms of derivative innovation performance than firms that apply a cross-functional structure for the incremental NPD process. These latter findings point to the relevance of adopting structural ambidexterity, where firms make an explicit distinction between incremental and radical NPD processes and organize them in a different way.

KW - Cross-functional structure

KW - Breakthrough innovation performance

KW - Derivative innovation performance

KW - IR-78334

KW - New product development process

KW - Structural ambidexterity

KW - METIS-268233

U2 - 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.09.008

DO - 10.1016/j.technovation.2009.09.008

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 291

EP - 299

JO - Technovation

JF - Technovation

SN - 0166-4972

IS - 5-6

ER -