IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v43y2014i2p349-366.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Balancing breadth and depth of expertise for innovation: A 3M story

Author

Listed:
  • Boh, Wai Fong
  • Evaristo, Roberto
  • Ouderkirk, Andrew

Abstract

This study examines how inventors’ breadth and depth of expertise influence innovation in 3M, a company renowned for sustained innovation for over a century. While prior research tends to examine a single indicator – the technical success achieved by the inventor – our study differentiates between three indicators of a successful inventor: (1) the number of inventions generated; (2) the extent to which the inventor has a significant impact in his or her technical domain; and (3) the inventor's career success, in terms of the commercial value they have brought by converting their inventions into products that generate sales for commercial organizations. We found that breadth of inventor expertise relates to the generation of many inventions, but not necessarily to those that are technically influential. Depth of inventor expertise enables individuals to generate technically influential inventions, as measured by patents granted. However, both breadth and depth of expertise are required for innovators to be deemed highly valuable, based on their records of effectively converting inventions into commercially successful products. Our study extends prior research on innovation in two ways. We provide a comprehensive view of how inventors’ expertise influences innovation and also show how inventors with different expertise profiles can contribute in unique ways to their organization.

Suggested Citation

  • Boh, Wai Fong & Evaristo, Roberto & Ouderkirk, Andrew, 2014. "Balancing breadth and depth of expertise for innovation: A 3M story," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 349-366.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:43:y:2014:i:2:p:349-366
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.009
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733313001881
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.009?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wu, Jianfeng & Shanley, Mark T., 2009. "Knowledge stock, exploration, and innovation: Research on the United States electromedical device industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 474-483, April.
    2. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    3. den Hond, Frank, 1998. "On the structuring of variation in innovation processes: a case of new product development in the crop protection industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 349-367, August.
    4. Benjamin F. Jones, 2011. "As Science Evolves, How Can Science Policy?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 11, pages 103-131, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    6. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Van de Ven, Andrew R., 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Agricultural Research Policy Seminar 139708, University of Minnesota Extension.
    8. Benjamin F. Jones, 2008. "The Knowledge Trap: Human Capital and Development Reconsidered," NBER Working Papers 14138, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. John Leslie King & Vijay Gurbaxani & Kenneth L. Kraemer & F. Warren McFarlan & K. S. Raman & C. S. Yap, 1994. "Institutional Factors in Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 139-169, June.
    10. Dietmar Harhoff & Francis Narin & F. M. Scherer & Katrin Vopel, 1999. "Citation Frequency And The Value Of Patented Inventions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 81(3), pages 511-515, August.
    11. Collinson, Simon C. & Wang, Rowena, 2012. "The evolution of innovation capability in multinational enterprise subsidiaries: Dual network embeddedness and the divergence of subsidiary specialisation in Taiwan," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1501-1518.
    12. Rebecca Henderson & Iain Cockburn, 1994. "Measuring Competence? Exploring Firm Effects in Pharmaceutical Research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 15(S1), pages 63-84, December.
    13. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    14. Andrew H. Van de Ven, 1986. "Central Problems in the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 590-607, May.
    15. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    16. Jasjit Singh, 2005. "Collaborative Networks as Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 756-770, May.
    17. Diane L. Rulke & Joseph Galaskiewicz, 2000. "Distribution of Knowledge, Group Network Structure, and Group Performance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(5), pages 612-625, May.
    18. Schmickl, Christina & Kieser, Alfred, 2008. "How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1148-1163, July.
    19. Kim, Bowon & Oh, Heungshik, 2002. "An effective R&D performance measurement system: survey of Korean R&D researchers," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 19-31, February.
    20. Pino G. Audia & Jack A. Goncalo, 2007. "Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-15, January.
    21. Atul Nerkar & Srikanth Paruchuri, 2005. "Evolution of R&D Capabilities: The Role of Knowledge Networks Within a Firm," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 771-785, May.
    22. Kim, Sunwoong, 1989. "Labor Specialization and the Extent of the Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(3), pages 692-705, June.
    23. Melissa A. Schilling & Patricia Vidal & Robert E. Ployhart & Alexandre Marangoni, 2003. "Learning by Doing Something Else: Variation, Relatedness, and the Learning Curve," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(1), pages 39-56, January.
    24. Schmickl, Christina & Kieser, Alfred, 2008. "How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 473-491, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    2. Paul Almeida & Anupama Phene & Sali Li, 2015. "The Influence of Ethnic Community Knowledge on Indian Inventor Innovativeness," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 198-217, February.
    3. Gino Cattani, 2005. "Preadaptation, Firm Heterogeneity, and Technological Performance: A Study on the Evolution of Fiber Optics, 1970–1995," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(6), pages 563-580, December.
    4. Melero, Eduardo & Palomeras, Neus, 2015. "The Renaissance Man is not dead! The role of generalists in teams of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 154-167.
    5. Wang, Fang, 2024. "Does the recombination of distant scientific knowledge generate valuable inventions? An analysis of pharmaceutical patents," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    6. Forman, Chris & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2019. "Digital technology adoption and knowledge flows within firms: Can the Internet overcome geographic and technological distance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    7. Stephanie Cheng & Pengkai Lin & Yinliang Tan & Yuchen Zhang, 2023. "“High” innovators? Marijuana legalization and regional innovation," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 32(3), pages 685-703, March.
    8. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    9. Turanay Caner & Susan K. Cohen & Frits Pil, 2017. "Firm heterogeneity in complex problem solving: A knowledge-based look at invention," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(9), pages 1791-1811, September.
    10. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. Christopher Esposito, 2021. "The Geography of Breakthrough Innovation in the United States over the 20th Century," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2126, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2021.
    12. Srikanth Paruchuri & Snehal Awate, 2017. "Organizational knowledge networks and local search: The role of intra‐organizational inventor networks," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 657-675, March.
    13. Wu, Jianfeng & Shanley, Mark T., 2009. "Knowledge stock, exploration, and innovation: Research on the United States electromedical device industry," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 474-483, April.
    14. Po‐Hsuan Hsu & Hai‐Ping Hui & Hsiao‐Hui Lee & Kevin Tseng, 2022. "Supply chain technology spillover, customer concentration, and product invention," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 393-417, April.
    15. Jeongsik “Jay” Lee, 2010. "Heterogeneity, Brokerage, and Innovative Performance: Endogenous Formation of Collaborative Inventor Networks," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(4), pages 804-822, August.
    16. Li, Zhengyu, 2016. "Essays on knowledge sourcing and technological capability : A knowledge structure perspective," Other publications TiSEM b8ff31fc-c57b-4bc3-b5a4-0, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    17. Amit Jain & Will Mitchell, 2022. "Specialization as a double‐edged sword: The relationship of scientist specialization with R&D productivity and impact following collaborator change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 986-1024, May.
    18. Konstantinos Grigoriou & Frank T. Rothaermel, 2017. "Organizing for knowledge generation: internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 395-414, February.
    19. Yan Anthea Zhang & Zhuo Emma Chen & Yuandi Wang, 2021. "Which patents to use as loan collaterals? The role of newness of patents' external technology linkage," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(10), pages 1822-1849, October.
    20. Rost, Katja, 2011. "The strength of strong ties in the creation of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 588-604, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:43:y:2014:i:2:p:349-366. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.