Abstract
This chapter presents empirical findings from a new product development (NPD) team in the Analog and Mixed Signal (AMS) business unit of a large multinational semiconductor company. More specifically, following Rizova (MIT Sloan Management Review 47(3): 49–55, 2006; Journal of Engineering & Technology Management 21(1/2): 51–82, 2004) we investigated three knowledge intensive interpersonal networks: seeking technical and organizational/managerial advice; discussing new ideas/innovation; as well as discussing the internal and external formal and informal structures underlying the NPD process in France and four additional sites in Italy, Czech, Finland, and India. This case study deals head on with the question of how to foster distributed and network NPD teams through the application of social network analysis for studying at the interpersonal level of analysis, a broad range of knowledge-intensive informal relations fuelling NPD processes in a cross-functional and multisite team. Our results highlight key individual roles, such as central connectors and knowledge brokers (Harvard Business Review 80: 104–112, 2002; California Management Review 49: 32–60, 2006), that team members play in such an NPD team, and identify key individuals in our case study. Moreover, based on in-depth semi-structured interviews with these key individuals we put forward a set of organizational capabilities for strengthening similar NPD teams in the semiconductor or other high-tech industries.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Assimakopoulos D, 2007, Technological Communities and Networks: Triggers and Drivers for Innovation, London, Routledge.
Autio, E., 1998, Evaluation of RTD in Regional Systems of Innovation, European Planning Studies, 6, 131–140.
Barney, J. B., 1991, Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage, Journal of Management Studies, 17, 99–120.
Borgatti, S.P., Everett, M.G. and Freeman, L.C., 2002, Ucinet for Windows: Software for Social Network Analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
Borgatti, S.P., 2002, Netdraw Network Visualization Software. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P., 2002, Local Knowledge: Innovation in the Networked Age, Management Learning, 33, 427–437.
Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P., 2001, Knowledge and Organization: a Social-Practice Perspective, Organization Science, 12, 198–213.
Brown, J.S. and Duguid, P., 2000, Mysteries of the Region: Knowledge Dynamics in Silicon Valley, in Lee, C., M., et al., (Eds.), The Silicon Valley Edge, Stanford, Stanford University Press, 16–39.
Burt, R. S., 1987, Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence, American Journal of Sociology, 92, 1287–1335.
Carayannis, E., and Alexander, J., 1999, Winning by Co-opeting in Strategic Government – University – Industry Partnerships, Journal of Technology Transfer, 24, 197–210.
Chesbrough, H. W., 2003, The Era of Open Innovation, MIT Sloan Management Review, Spring, 44, 35–41.
Chesbrough, H. W., and Crowther, A. K., 2006, Beyond High-tech: Early Adopters of Open Innovation in Other Industries, R&D Management, 36, 229–236.
Christensen, J L, and Lundvall, B A, (Eds.), 2004, Product Innovation, Interactive Learning and Economic Performance, Oxford, Elsevier.
Cooper R G, Edgett S J, and Kleinschmidt E J, 2004, Benchmarking Best NPD Processes - III, Research, Technology Management, 47, 43–55.
Cross, R., and Prusak, L., 2002, The People Who Make Organizations Go or Stop, Harvard Business Review, 80, 104–112.
Cross, R., and Parker, A., 2004, The Hidden Power of Social Networks, Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
Cross, R., et al., 2006, Using Social Network Analysis to Improve Communities of Practice, California Management Review, 49, 32–60.
Doak S and Assimakopoulos D, 2007, How Forensic Scientists Learn to Investigate Cases in Practice, R&D Management, 37, 113–122.
Doz, Y., Santos, J. and Williamson, P., 2001, From Global to Metanational: How Companies Win in the Knowledge Economy, Boston, Harvard Business School Press.
Dyer, J. H., and Singh, H., 1998, The Relational View, Academy of Management Review, 23, 660–679.
Eisenhardt, K. M., and Martin, J. A., 2000, Dynamic Capabilities, Strategic Management Journal, 21, 1105–1121.
Ettlie, J.E. and Pavlou, P.A., 2006, Technology-based New Product Development Partnerships. Decision Science, 37, 117–147.
Etzkowitz, H., 2003, Research Groups as ‘Quasi Firms’: the Invention of the Entrepreneurial University, Research Policy, 32, 109–121.
Feldman, M., 2000, Organizational Routines as a Source of Continuous Change, Organization Science 11, 611–629.
Granovetter, M., 1982, The Strength of Weak Ties, in Marsden, P. V. and Lin, N. (Eds.) Social Structure and Network Analysis, Beverly Hills, Sage, 105–130.
Hansen, M., 1999, The Search-Transfer Problem, Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82–111.
Kogut, B., and Zander, U., 1996, What Firms Do? Coordination, Identity, and Learning, Organization Science, 7, 502–518.
Kleinschmidt E J., de Brentani U, Salomo S., 2007, Performance of Global New Product Development Programs, Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 419–441.
Lave, J. and Wenger, E., 1991, Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Leonard, D. and Sensiper, S., 1998, The role of Tacit Knowledge in Group Innovation, California Management Review, 40, 112–132.
Rizova, P., 2004, The Meaning of Success: Network Position and the Social Construction of Project Outcomes in an R&D Lab, Journal of Engineering & Technology Management, 21(1/2), 51–82.
Rizova, P., 2006, Are you Networked for Successful Innovation? MIT Sloan Management Review, 47(3), 49–55.
Rosenkopf, L. and Tushman, M., 1998, The Coevolution of Community Networks and Technology, Industrial and Corporate Change, 7, 311–346.
Santos, J., Doz, Y. and Williamson, P., 2004, Is your Innovation Process Global? MIT Sloan Management Review, Summer, 45, 31–37.
Saxenian, A., 2006, The New Argonauts: Regional Advantage in a Global Economy, Boston, Harvard University Press.
Spender, J., 1996, Making Knowledge the Basis of a Dynamic Theory of the Firm, Strategic Management Journal, 17, 45–62.
Swan, J., Scarbrough, H. and Robertson, M., 2002, The Construction of Communities of Practice in the Management of Innovation, Management Learning, 33, 477–496.
Teece, D. J., 1987, Profiting from Technological Innovation, in Teece, D. J., (ed) The Competitive Challenge, Boston, Ballinger, 185–219.
Van Maanen, J. and Barley, S. R., 1984, Occupational Communities: Culture and Control in Organizations, Research in Organizational Behaviour, 6, 287–316.
Von Hippel, E., 2005, Democratizing Innovation, Boston, MIT Press.
Wasserman, S. and Faust, K., 1994, Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Wenger, E., 1998, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Assimakopoulos, D.G., Chapelet, B. (2012). Knowledge Flows in an NPD Team from the Semiconductor Industry. In: Assimakopoulos, D., Carayannis, E., Dossani, R. (eds) Knowledge Perspectives of New Product Development. Innovation, Technology, and Knowledge Management. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0248-0_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-0248-0_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4614-0247-3
Online ISBN: 978-1-4614-0248-0
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsBusiness and Management (R0)