When less is more: the downside of customer knowledge sharing in new product development teams
- 27 Downloads
Despite the common belief that knowledge sharing in new product development (NPD) teams is beneficial, empirical findings are mixed. We adopt a microfoundations perspective and draw from the socio-cognitive theory to propose a model that theorizes a nonlinear effect of customer knowledge sharing behaviors on NPD performance. In particular, we identify the underlying mechanism through which shared common customer knowledge and perceived diagnostic value shape the nonlinear returns to customer knowledge sharing behaviors. In Study 1, data from the biotechnology industry provide support for the hypothesis that customer knowledge sharing behaviors in NPD teams have an inverted U-shaped relationship with NPD performance. In Study 2, data from business-to-business (B2B) industries demonstrate that customer knowledge sharing behaviors are positively related to shared common customer knowledge in NPD teams, and the latter has an inverted U-shaped effect on NPD performance. Finally, this nonlinear effect is moderated by the team’s perceived diagnostic value of customer knowledge, such that the inflection point of the inverted U-shaped curve is shifted upward in teams with high levels of perceived diagnostic value of customer knowledge, strengthening the impact of shared common knowledge on NPD performance.
KeywordsNew product development NPD B2B Customer knowledge Knowledge sharing Shared knowledge Socio-cognitive theory Team Diagnostic
This work was supported by the Robert J. Trulaske, Sr. College of Business Small Grant Program.
- Angrist, J. D., & Pischke, J. S. (2009). Mostly harmless econometrics: An Empiricist’s companion. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Ansoff, H. I., & McDonnell, E. J. (1984). Implanting strategic management. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice/Hall International.Google Scholar
- Bandura, A. (2011). The social and policy impact of socio-cognitive theory. In M. Mark, S. Donaldson, & B. Campbell (Eds.), Social psychology and evaluation (pp. 33–70). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Bliese, P. D. (2000). Within-group agreement, non-Independence, and reliability: Implications for data aggregation and analysis. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 349–381). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Bloomberg. (2013). Nokia Exits Mobile Phone Business. Retrieved from http://www.thedailystar.net/news/nokia-exits-mobile-phone-business. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
- Burke, K. (2015). Why transparency is good for business. Retrieved from https://www.glassdoor.com/employers/blog/why-transparency-is-good-for-business/. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
- Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied Multipl regression/ correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
- Cooke, N. J., Gorman, J. C., & Rowe, L. J. (2009). An ecological perspective on team cognition. In E. Salas, J. Goodwin, & C. S. Burke (Eds.), Team effectiveness in complex organizations: Cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches (pp. 157–182). Taylor & Francis: SIOP Organizational Frontiers Series.Google Scholar
- Diehl, M., & Stroebe, W. (1991). Productivity loss in idea generating groups: Tracking down the blocking effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(3), 392–403.Google Scholar
- Diehl, M., Munkes, J., & Ziegler, R. (2002). Brainstorming and cognitive stimulation: When does being exposed to the ideas of others facilitate or inhibit One’s own idea generation. In Conference of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, San Sebastian, Spain (Vol. 200).Google Scholar
- Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, phone, mail, and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (4th ed.). Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Fiore, S. M. (2012). Cognition and technology: Interdisciplinarity and the impact of cognitive engineering research on organizational productivity. In S. Koslowski (Ed.), Oxford handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 1306–1322). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Greene, W. (2012). Econometric analysis (7th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
- Griffin, A., Josephson, B. W., Lilien, G., Wiersema, F., Bayus, B., Chandy, R., Dahan, E., Gaskin, S., Kohli, A., Miller, C., Oliva, R., & Spanjol, J. (2013). Marketing’s roles in innovation in business-to-business firms: Status, issues, and research agenda. Marketing Letters, 24(4), 323–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hayes, A. F., & Preacher, K. J. (2010). Quantifying and testing indirect effects in simple mediation models when the constituent paths are nonlinear. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45(4), 627–660.Google Scholar
- Homburg, C., Wieseke, J., & Bornemann, T. (2009). Implementing the marketing concept at the employee–customer Interface: The role of customer need knowledge. Journal of Marketing, 73(4), 64–81.Google Scholar
- Keller, R. T. (2001). Cross-functional project groups in research and new product development: Diversity, communications, job stress, and outcomes. Academy of Management Journal, 44(3), 547–555.Google Scholar
- Kozlowski, S. W. J., Gully, S. M., Nason, E. R., & Smith, E. M. (1999). Developing adaptive teams: A theory of compilation and performance across levels and time. In D. R. Ilgen & E. D. Pulakos (Eds.), The changing nature of performance: Implications for staffing, motivation, and development (pp. 240–292). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Leonard, D., Swap, W., & Barton, G. (2014). What’s lost when experts retire. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/12/whats-lost-when-experts-retire. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
- Levine, J. M., & Thompson, L. (1996). Conflict in groups. In E. T. Higgins & A. W. Kruglanski (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (pp. 745–776). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
- Liu, Y., Wang, M., Chang, C. H., Shi, J., Zhou, L., & Shao, R. (2015b). Work–family conflict, emotional exhaustion, and displaced aggression toward others: The moderating roles of workplace interpersonal conflict and perceived managerial family support. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100(3), 793–808.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Marr, B. (2018). How Much Data Do We Create Every Day? The Mind-Blowing Stats Everyone Should Read. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2018/ 05/21/how-much-data-do-we-create-every-day-the-mind-blowing-stats-everyone-should-read/#2754429660ba. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
- Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus User’s Guide. Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
- Nicholas, J. M. (1994). Concurrent engineering: Overcoming obstacles to teamwork. Production and Inventory Management Journal, 35(3), 18–22.Google Scholar
- Nonaka, I., & Takeuchi, H. (1995). The knowledge creation company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Quast, L. (2012). Why Knowledge Management is Important to the Success of Your Company. Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/lisaquast/2012/08/20/why-knowledge-management-is-important-to-the-success-of-your-company/#7cb4b8643681. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
- Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks: Sage.Google Scholar
- Rogers, W. H. (1994). Regression standard errors in clustered samples. Stata Technical Bulletin, 3(13).Google Scholar
- Rozovsky, J. (2015). The Five Keys to a Successful Google Team. Retrieved from https://rework.withgoogle.com/blog/five-keys-to-a-successful-google-team/. Accessed 12 Dec 2018.
- Salas, E., Fiore, S. M., & Letsky, M. P. (Eds.). (2012). Theories of team cognition: Cross-disciplinary perspectives. New York: Taylor & Francis Group.Google Scholar
- Stroebe, W., Nijstad, B. A., & Rietzschel, E. F. (2010). Beyond productivity loss in brainstorming groups: The evolution of a question. In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 43, pp. 157-203). Academic Press.Google Scholar
- White, H. C. (1992). Identity and control: A structural theory of social action. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar