Organisatsiooni disain on üks huvitav ja iga organisatsiooni toimimise seisukohast oluline valdkond. Kuna disaini mõju ei ole võimalik üle hinnata, oleks arukas sellesse tõsiselt suhtuda. Lisaks on tegemist väga teadmiste-nõudliku valdkonnaga ning sestap siinviidatud vabalevis olev tekst oma koha leidiski. Kuna tekst panustab ja fokuseerib organisatsioonide arengu ja analüüsiga seotud valdkonnas, siis võiks võimalike lugemishuviliste ringi veelgi avarduda.


Innovation is a key determinant of a firm’s overall performance (e.g., Liebeskind, 1996; Rothaermel, 2001). Strategic management scholars tend to view innovation through the lens of firms searching to find solutions to problems through recombining their existing knowledge (Dosi, Levinthal, & Marengo, 2003; Fleming, 2001; Kapoor & Lim, 2007). In contrast, scholars engrained in the organizational economics tradition tend to view innovation through the lens of incentives designed to encourage innovation-related outcomes (Holmstrom & Milgrom, 1994; Lerner & Wulf, 2007; Manso, 2011).


This tension is mirrored in the extant literature with some studies emphasizing the innovation benefits of R&D centralization (Argyres et al., 2020; Argyres & Silverman, 2004; Arora, Belenzon, & Rios, 2014; Zhang, Baden-Fuller, & Mangematin, 2007), while others suggest that decentralization of R&D is associated with the creation of more new products and can facilitate greater novelty in upstream innovation (Ecker, van Triest, & Williams, 2013; Leiponen & Helfat, 2011).

Autor lubab:

In this study, I try to resolve this tension between organizing to enhance knowledge flows or optimize incentives through examining the novelty of inventions that a firm creates and subsequently develops.

Tsentraliseeritud ja detsentraliseeritud

Organisatsioonidisain on oluline:

In contrast, this study illustrates that a knowledge-based activity is subject to incentives considerations which can shape how internal organization design impacts firms’ innovation outcomes. Namely, firms need to manage a delicate trade-off when determining their internal organizational designs.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

On the one hand, organizing to enhance rich intraorganizational knowledge flows requires many pathways for knowledge to flow which is facilitated by more centralized structures (Argyres et al., 2019; Zhang et al., 2007). On the other hand, more decentralized structures enable the more effective use of managerial incentives (Zenger & Hesterly, 1997).

Fragment panusest:

In doing so, this work highlights that it is important to understand where (in the organization, e.g., R&D) and when (i.e., innovation stage) design choices are made as well as what inventions are created and developed (i.e., degree of novelty) to fully appreciate the role of design on firms’ innovation outcomes.

Eklund, J. C. (2022) The Knowledge‐Incentive Tradeoff: Understanding the Relationship between Research and Development Decentralization and InnovationStrategic Management Journal.