4.7 Article

Is open innovation imprinted on new ventures? The cooperation-inhibiting legacy of authoritarian regimes

期刊

RESEARCH POLICY
卷 51, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104409

关键词

Open innovation; Imprinting theory; Authoritarian regimes; Surveillance; Organizational decision-making; R& D cooperation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Existing research focuses on the impact of founders in defining open innovation strategies, with founders less likely to engage if experiences lead to lack of trust. Exposure to surveillance activities in authoritarian regimes can leave a long-lasting imprint, affecting strategic decisions.
Extant research explores the role played by individuals and, in particular, founders in defining open innovation strategies at the firm level. We join this discussion by combining insights from imprinting literature that explores the enduring impact of a founder's personal history, with inputs from literature that stresses the impact of past experience on trust formation. We suggest that founders are less likely to engage in open innovation if their experiences engender a generalized lack of trust. We use a unique database that includes East and West German founders to identify regional differences in activities conducted by authoritarian regimes that could inhibit trust. We find that founders who were exposed to high levels of secret police surveillance in the former socialist German Democratic Republic (GDR) are less likely to engage in interfirm R&D cooperation. We contribute to the literature on open innovation by exploring how a founder's social, political, and cultural backgrounds influence strategic decisions related to open innovation, and to recent imprinting literature by showing that variation in oppressive enforcement practices in authoritarian regimes, such as surveillance activities, can leave an enduring imprint. Our findings complement recent insights on ideological imprinting effects on young firms' decision making.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据