Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Strategy-making for innovation management and the development of corporate universities

  • Technical Paper
  • Published:
International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing (IJIDeM) Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Innovation is now seen as a question of corporate survival and international competitiveness. While most innovation fails, companies that don’t innovate in the long term die. The importance of crafting a sound and coherent innovation strategy appears crucial in many industries, even more in turbulent environments where clear guidelines help managers allocate R&D resources internally or acquire technologies outside the firm. The paper is organized the following way: in Sect. 2 the rigidity and structure related with strategic planning are compared with the flexibility and learning approach of strategy-making. In Sect. 3, organic (or internal) growth and external development of innovation are analyzed. In Sect. 4, the link between innovation strategy-making and R&D resource allocation is covered. In Sect. 5, a discussion section integrates and compares the key streams in the strategy-making literature that is particularly relevant for innovation management. Finally, in conclusion some areas for further research are suggested. Some authors argue that formal planning and incrementalism both form part of good strategic planning, especially in unstable environments. They also report that a period of learning in planning is also important. The crucial issue seems to be how individual learning is transferred to the organization and the shared mental models are what make the rest of the organizational memory usable. One tool which can stimulates such individual and organizational learning is the recent popularity of corporate universities. The aim of managers should be to institutionalize learning. It is necessary to strengthen and diversify competencies in an organizational process to so called “metacompetencies”. For Hamel and Prahalad, strategy is more than the allocation of scarce resources across competing projects; it is the quest to overcome resource constraints through a creative and unending pursuit of better resource leverage with the corporation conceived as a portfolio of competencies as well as a portfolio of businesses, and innovation projects. Incumbents that focus their network strategy on exploiting complementary assets through alliances generally outperform incumbents that focus on exploring the new technology. The technological strategies of corporate firms have several similarities to the investment strategy of venture capitalists. They are looking for complementarities between investments to nurture specialized knowledge and extract greater value with synergies. Appendix 2 proposes a new integrative model by making the connections between the strategy-making process and the R&D strategic resource allocation management process. Top managers should try to control the initial cost structure of new growth business, because it influence greatly the critical resource allocation decisions in that business, and also recognize emergent strategies through process such as discovery-driven planning and select the right mix of emergent versus deliberate strategies for each businesses in the organization. The determinants of product innovation in firms are mainly explained by the strategy being pursued and managers should be careful to not drift toward excessive conservatism or excessive entrepreneurship over innovation management. Some experts argue that strategic management, when continuously practised may develop in a firm core capability may have more enduring effects on the firm’s long-term performance than one-time strategies. Flexible strategic planning for innovation management appears more efficient, particularly in turbulent environments. A bottom-up approach of technology strategy-making favorizes the crafting of emergent strategies. One tool, communities of practice has an important influence on strategy-making for innovation management due to empowerment. A corporate university can become another influent knowledge management strategic tool, only if enough resources are devoted to its development and managers adopt a long-term perspective.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Perceived value or quality.

  2. (i.e. SONET products at Nortel have faced a technological impasse over Ethernet and IP products, since the market didn’t support this type of technological due to a lack of industrial commitment.)

  3. They are among the first investors in America Online, Compaq, Netscape, Juniper, Sun, Genentech. Such companies defined new business sectors or redefined existing ones.

  4. See Table 2.

  5. http://thomsonreuters.com/press-releases/102013/thomson-reuters-2013-top-100-global-innovators.

References

  1. Chesbrough, H.: Open Innovation: The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Matheson, D., Matheson, J.: The Smart Organization: Creating Value Through Strategic R&D. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Burgelman, R., Maidique, M., Wheelwright, S.: Strategic Management of Technology and Innovation, 2nd edn. Irwin, Boston (1995)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Markides, C.: Strategic innovation. Sloan Manag. Review. 38, 9–24 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Christensen, C.: The Innovator’s Dilemma: When Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brews, P.J., Hunt, M.R.: Learning to plan and planning to learn: resolving the planning school/learning school debate. Strateg. Manag. J. 20, 889–913 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Andrews, K.: The Concept of Corporate Strategy, 3rd edn. Irwin, Homewood (1987)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mintzberg, H.: The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning: Reconceiving the Roles for Planning, Plans, Planners. Free Press, Toronto, New York, pp. 458 (1994)

  9. Quinn, J.B.: Strategies for Change: Logical Incrementalism. Irwin, Homewood (1980)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Andersen, T.J.: Strategic planning, autonomous actions and corporate performance. Long Range Plan. 33(2), 184–200 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Brown, J.S., Duguid, P.: Creativity versus structure: a useful tension. Sloan Manag. Rev. 41–46 (2001)

  12. Miller, D.: Configurations of strategy and structure: towards a synthesis. Strateg. Manag. J. 7, 233–249 (1986)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Miles, R., Snow, C.: Organizational Strategy, Structure and Process. McGraw-Hill, New York (1978)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Harris, L.: The learning organisation-myth or reality? Examples from the UK retail banks. Learn. Organ. 9(2), 78–88 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rhéaume, L., Gardoni, M.: The challenges facing corporate universities in dealing with open innovation. J. Workplace Learn. 27(4), 315–328 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Pulcrano, J: Serving the Future Needs of Business in Management Development and Retention, AACB, EMBAC & UNICON, 1–78 (2013)

  17. Senge, P.: Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Century, London (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Crossan, M., Berdrow, I.: Organizational learning and strategic renewal. Strateg. Manag. J. 24, 1087–1105 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cohen, W., Levinthal, D.: Innovation and learning: two faces of R&D. Econ. J. 99(397), 569–596 (1989)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mintzberg, H., Waters, J.: Of strategies, deliberate and emergent. Strateg. Manag. J. 6, 257–272 (1985)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hamel, G., Prahalad, C.K.: Competing for the Future. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Barney, J.: Gaining and Sustaining Competitive Advantage. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Miller, D.: An asymmetry-based view of advantage: towards an attainable sustainability. Strateg. Manag. J. 24(10), 961–976 (2003)

  24. Veugelers, R., Cassiman, B.: Make and buy in innovation strategies: evidence from Belgian manufacturing firms. Res. Policy 28(1), 63–80 (1999)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Spencer, J.: Firms’ knowledge-sharing strategies in the global innovation system: empirical evidence from the flat panel display industry. Strateg. Manag. J. 24(3), 217–233 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rothaermel, F.T.: Incumbent’s advantage through exploiting complementary assets via interfirm cooperation. Strateg. Manag. J. 22(6–7), 687–699 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Danneels, E.: The dynamics of product innovation and firm competences. Strateg. Manag. J. 23, 1095–1121 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Brown, S., Eisenhardt, K.: Competing on the edge: strategy as structured chaos. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Roberts, E., Liu, W.K.: Ally or acquire? How technology leaders decide. Sloan Manag. Rev. 17, 161–181 (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  30. Quinn, J.B.: Outsourcing innovation: the new engine of growth. Sloan Manag. Rev. 183–220 (2000)

  31. Hitt, M., Hoskisson, R., Johnson, R., Moesel, D.: The market for corporate control and firm innovation. Acad. Manag. J. 39(5), 1084–1119 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Debruyne, M., Moenaert, R., Griffin, A., Hart, S., Hultink, E.J., Robben, H.: The impact of new product launch strategies on competitive reaction in industrial markets. J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 19(2), 159–170 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Porter, M.: Competitive strategy revisited: a view from the 1990s. In: Barker Duffy, P. (ed.) The Relevance of a Decade, pp. 244–285. Harvard Business School Press, Cambridge (1994)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Waites, R.: Reinventing corporate research. Res. Technol. Manag. 45(4), 15–23 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  35. Burgelman, R.A.: Fading memories: a process study of strategic business exit in dynamic environments. Adm. Sci. Q. 29, 24–56 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Burgelman, R.: A process model of internal corporate venturing in the diversified major firm. Adm. Sci. Q. 28(2), 223–244 (1983)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Noda, T., Bower, J.: Strategy making as iterated processes of resource allocation. Strateg. Manag. J. 17, 159–192 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Christensen, C., Raynor, M.: The Innovator’s Solution: Creating and Sustaining Successful Growth. Harvard Business School Press, Boston (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rhéaume, L.: A review of literature on the strategic portfolio management of innovation projects, ÉTS, Working paper (2014)

  40. Christensen, C., Bower, J.: Customer power, strategic investment, and the failure of leading firms. Strateg. Manag. J. 17, 197–218 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Mezias, S., Glynn, M.A.: The three faces of corporate renewal: institution, revolution, and evolution. Strateg. Manag. J. 14(2), 77–101 (1993)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. O’Brien, J.: The capital structure implications of pursuing a strategy of innovation. Strateg. Manag. J. 24(5), 415–431 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Miller, D., Friesen, P.H.: Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: two models of strategic momentum. Strateg. Manag. J. 3(1), 1–25 (1982)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Chakravarthy, B.: A new strategy framework for coping with turbulence. Sloan Manag. Rev. 38(2), 69–82 (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  45. Farjoun, M.: Towards an organic perspective on strategy. Strateg. Manag. J. 23(7), 561–594 (2002)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Grove, A.: Only the Paranoid Survive: How to Exploit the Crisis Points that Challenge Every Company. Random House, New York (1996)

    Google Scholar 

  47. Song, M., Im, S., van der Bij, H., Song, L.Z.: Does strategic planning enhance or impede innovation and firm performance? J. Prod. Innov. Manag. 28(4), 503–520 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Suzuki, Y.: NEC charts path to future prosperity. Strateg. Dir. 16(7), 25–26 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  49. Methe, D.T., Toyama, R., Miyabe, J.: Product development strategy and organizational learning: a tale of two PC makers. J. Product. Innov. Manag. 14(5), 323–337 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Cristol, D., Mellet, D.: Développer une université d’entreprise: créer un levier de business development, ED. SOCIALES FRANCAISES, ESF Éditeur (2013)

  51. Saint-Onge, H., Wallace, D.: Leveraging Communities of Practice for Strategic Advantage. Butterworth-Heinemann, Burlington (2011). 370 pages

    Google Scholar 

  52. Schiavone, F.: Communities of Practice and Vintage Innovation. Springer Briefs in Business. Springer, New York (2014)

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mickaël Gardoni.

Appendices

Appendix 1

See Fig. 2.

Fig. 2
figure 2

The process by which strategy is defined and implemented [38]

Appendix 2

See Fig. 3.

Fig. 3
figure 3

Adapted from Rhéaume [39]

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rhéaume, L., Gardoni, M. Strategy-making for innovation management and the development of corporate universities. Int J Interact Des Manuf 10, 73–84 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-015-0291-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-015-0291-2

Keywords

Navigation