We studied the management of internal R&D stakeholders and their involvement dynamics in breakthrough R&D projects. Building on a longitudinal research partnership with a global car manufacturer since 2005, this research highlights the important dynamics of involvement among internal R&D stakeholders in the engineering development organization. Some stakeholders—who served as experts, innovation design strategists, or internal collaboration strategists—succeeded in involving the individuals needed for the project's progress, sometimes generating an over-commitment. The success of the rationale of these stakeholders on engineering resource involvement depended on the perceived legitimacy of their owners.
AaltonenK. (2011). Project stakeholder analysis as an environmental interpretation process. International Journal of Project Management, 29(2), 165–183.
2.
AbernathyW. J., & UtterbackJ.M. (1978). Patterns of innovation in technology. Technology Review, 80(7), 40–47.
3.
AchterkampM. C., & VosJ. F. J. (2008). Investigating the use of the stakeholder notion in project management literature: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Project Management, 26(7), 749–757.
4.
AdlerN., ShaniR., & StyhreA. (Eds.). (2004). Collaborative research in organizations: Foundations for learning, change and theoretical development.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5.
AkrichM., CallonM., LatourB., & MonaghanA. (2002a). The key to success in innovation part I: The art of interessement. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(02), 187–206.
6.
AkrichM., CallonM., LatourB., & MonaghanA. (2002b). The key to success in innovation part II: The art of choosing good spokespersons. International Journal of Innovation Management, 6(02), 207–225.
7.
AkroydC., NarayanS., & SridharanV. (2006). The use of management control systems in new product development: Advancing the “help or hinder” debate. Auckland regional accounting conference, AUT, Auckland, New Zealand.
BaldwinC. Y., & ClarkK.B. (2000). Design rules: The power of modularity (Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10.
BeringerC., JonasD., & KockA. (2013). Behavior of internal stakeholders in project portfolio management and its impact on success. International Journal of Project Management, 31(6), 830–846.
11.
BessantJ., Von StammB., MoesleinK. M., & NeyerA.K. (2010). Backing outsiders: Selection strategies for discontinuous innovation. R&D Management, 40(4), 345–356.
12.
BörjessonS., ElmquistM., & HoogeS. (2014). The challenges of innovation capability building: Learning from longitudinal studies of innovation efforts at Renault and Volvo Cars. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 31, 120–140.
13.
CallonM. (1986). Some elements of sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of the Saint Brieuc Bay. In LawJ. (Ed.), Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge? Sociological Review Monograph (pp. 196–233). London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
14.
CaruthG.D. (2013). Demystifying mixed methods research design: A review of the literature. Mevlana International Journal of Education, 3(2), 112–122.
15.
ChristensenC. (1997). The innovator's dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail.New York, NY: Harvard Business School Press.
16.
ChristiansenJ. K., & VarnesC.J. (2007). Making decisions on innovation: Meetings or networks?Creativity and Innovation Management, 16(3), 282–298.
17.
CoombsR., McMeekinA., & PybusR. (1998). Toward the development of benchmarking tools for R&D project management. R&D Management, 28(3), 175–186.
18.
CooperR.G. (2008). Perspective: The Stage-Gate® idea-to-launch process—update, what's new, and NexGen systems. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(3), 213–232.
19.
CooperR. G., EdgettS. J., & KleinschmidtE.J. (2001). Portfolio management for new product development: Results of an industry practices study. R&D Management, 31(4), 361–380.
20.
CreswellJ.W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. International Edition. New York, NY: Pearson Education.
21.
DalmassoC., & ManiakR. (2015). How does an offshore R&D unit starts and grows up? Insights from the automotive industry. Management International, 19(4), 83–94.
22.
DonaldsonT., & PrestonL.E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 65–91.
23.
DosiG. (1988). The nature of the innovative process. Technical Change and Economic Theory, 2, 590–607.
24.
EisenhardtK. M., & GraebnerM.E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.
25.
EliasA.A. (2015). Analysing the stakes of stakeholders in research and development project management: A systems approach. R&D Management. doi: 10.1111/radm.12122.
26.
EliasA. A., & CavanaR.Y. (2000). Stakeholder analysis for systems thinking and modeling (Conference paper). Wellington, New Zealand: Victoria University of Wellington.
27.
EliasA. A., CavanaR. Y., & JacksonL.S. (2002). Stakeholder analysis for R&D projects management. R&D Management, 32(4), 300–310.
28.
FaulknerT.W. (1996). Applying “options thinking” to R&D valuation. Research Technology Management, 39(3), 50.
29.
FreemanR.E. (1984). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach.Boston, MA: Pitman.
30.
FreemanR.E. (1994). The politics of stakeholder theory: Some future directions. Business Ethics Quarterly, 4(4), 409–421.
31.
FreemanR. E., RusconiG., SignoriS., & StrudlerA. (2012). Stakeholder theory (ies): Ethical ideas and managerial action. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(1), 1–2.
32.
GillierT., HoogeS., & PiatG. (2015). Framing value management for creative projects: An expansive perspective. International Journal of Project Management, 33(4), 947–960.
33.
HallB.H. (2005). The financing of innovation (Blackwell handbook of technology management).Oxford, England: Blackwell.
34.
HallJ. K., & MartinM.J. (2005). Disruptive technologies, stakeholders and the innovation value-added chain: A framework for evaluating radical technology development. R&D Management, 35(3), 273–284.
35.
HatchuelA., & DavidA. (2007). Collaborating for management research: From action research to intervention research in management. In ShaniA. B., MohrmanS. A., PasmoreW. A., StymneB., & AdlerN. (Eds.), Handbook of collaborative management research (pp. 143–162). London, England: Sage.
36.
HatchuelA., Le MassonP., ReichY., & WeilB. (2011, August 15–19). A systematic approach of design theories using generativeness and robustness. Proceedings of the 18th international conference on engineering design (ICED 11), Lyngby/Copenhagen, Denmark.
37.
HatchuelA., Le MassonP., & WeilB. (2006). Building innovation capabilities: The development of design-oriented organizations. In HageJ., & MeeusM. (Eds.), Innovation, science, and institutional change: The handbook of research (pp. 294–312). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
38.
HendersonR. M., & ClarkK.B. (1990). Architectural innovation: The reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1), 9–30.
39.
HendriksM., VoetenB., & KroepL. (1999). Human resource allocation in a multi-project R&D environment: Resource capacity allocation and project portfolio planning in practice. International Journal of Project Management, 17(3), 181–188.
40.
HoogeS., & HatchuelA. (2008). Value indicators and monitoring in innovative product development management: A grounded approach. 15th international product development management conference (IPDMC), Hamburg, Germany.
41.
HoogeS., & Le DuL. (2014). Stimulating industrial ecosystems with sociotechnical imaginaries: The case of Renault Innovation Community.Valencia, Spain: European Academy of Management (EURAM).
42.
JepsenA. L., & EskerodP. (2009). Stakeholder analysis in projects: Challenges in using current guidelines in the real world. International Journal of Project Management, 27(4), 335–343.
43.
JonesT. M., & WicksA.C. (1999). Convergent stakeholder theory. Academy of Management Review, 24, 206–221.
44.
KatzR., & AllenT.J. (1982). Investigating the not invented here (NIH) syndrome: A look at the performance, tenure, and communication patterns of 50 R & D Project Groups. R&D Management, 12(1), 7–20.
45.
KelleyD., & LeeH. (2010). Managing innovation champions: The impact of project characteristics on the direct manager role. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 27(7), 1007–1019.
46.
KoenP. A., AjamianG., BoyceS., ClamenA., FisherE., FountoulakisS., … SeibertR. (2002). Fuzzy front end: Effective methods, tools, and techniques. In BelliveauP., GriffinA., & SomermeyerS. (Eds.), PDMA Toolbook for New Product Development (pp. 2–35). New York, NY: Wiley.
47.
Le MassonP., WeilB., & HatchuelA. (2010). Strategic management of innovation and design.New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
48.
LenfleS. (2008). Exploration and project management. International Journal of Project Management, 26(5), 469–478.
49.
Leonard-BartonD. (1992). Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development. Strategic Management Journal, 13, 111–125.
50.
LundT. (2012). Combining qualitative and quantitative approaches: Some arguments for mixed methods research. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 56(2), 155–165.
51.
LycettM., RassauA., & DansonJ. (2004). Programme management: A critical review. International Journal of Project Management, 22(4), 289–299.
52.
MeadeL. M., & PresleyA. (2002). R&D project selection using the analytic network process. IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management, 49(1), 59–66.
53.
MidlerC., & BeaumeR. (2010). Project-based learning patterns for dominant design renewal: The case of electric vehicle. International Journal of Project Management, 28(2), 142–150.
54.
MitchellR. K., AgleB. R., & WoodD.J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22, 853–886.
55.
NevilleB. A., BellS. J., & WhitwellG.J. (2011). Stakeholder salience revisited: Refining, redefining, and refueling an underdeveloped conceptual tool. Journal of Business Ethics, 102(3), 357–378.
56.
NonakaI. (1991). The knowledge-creating company. Harvard Business Review, 69(6), 96–104.
57.
NonakaI., & PeltokorpiV. (2006). Knowledge-based view of radical innovation: Toyota Prius case. In HageJ., & MeeusM. (Eds.), Innovation, science, and institutional change: A research handbook (pp. 88–104). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
58.
NonakaI., & TakeuchiH. (1995). The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation.Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
59.
NumagamiT., KarubeM., & KatoT. (2010). Organizational deadweight: Learning from Japan. The Academy of Management Perspectives, 24(4), 25–37.
60.
O'ConnorG.C. (2008). Major innovation as a dynamic capability: A systems approach. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 25(4), 313–330.
61.
OlanderS., & LandinA. (2005). Evaluation of stakeholder influence in the implementation of construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 23(4), 321–328.
62.
PellegrinelliS., PartingtonD., HemingwayC., MohdzainZ., & ShahM. (2007). The importance of context in programme management: An empirical review of programme practices. International Journal of Project Management, 25(1), 41–55.
63.
PhillipsR. (2003). Stakeholder legitimacy. Business Ethics Quarterly, 13(01), 25–41.
64.
PichM. T., LochC. H., & De MeyerA. (2002). On uncertainty, ambiguity, and complexity in project management. Management Science, 48(8), 1008–1023.
65.
PostJ. E., PrestonL. E., & SachsS. (2002). Managing the extended enterprise: The new stakeholder view. California Management Review, 45(1), 6–28.
66.
RadaelliG., GuerciM., CirellaS., & ShaniA. B. R. (2012). Intervention research as management research in practice: Learning from case in the fashion design industry. British Journal of Management, 25, 335–351.
67.
SavageG. T., BunnM. D., GrayB., XiaoQ., WangS., WilsonE. J., & WilliamsE.S. (2010). Stakeholder collaboration: Implications for stakeholder theory and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 96(1), 21–26.
TeeceD.J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28(13), 1319–1350.
70.
UtterbackJ. (1994). Mastering the dynamics of innovation: How companies can seize opportunities in the face of technological change.Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
71.
VergantiR. (1999). Planned flexibility: Linking anticipation and reaction in product development projects. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 16(4), 363–376.
72.
WheelwrightS. C., & ClarkK.B. (1992). Creating project plans to focus product development.Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
73.
WilsonE. J., BunnM. D., & SavageG.T. (2010). Anatomy of a social partnership: A stakeholder perspective. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), 76–90.
74.
VenkateshV., BrownS., & BalaH. (2013). Bridging the qualitative–quantitative divide: Guidelines for conducting mixed methods research in information systems. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 37(1), 21–54.
75.
YinR.K. (1989). Applied Social Research Methods Series (Vol. 5). Case study research: Design and methods.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
76.
ZolloM., & WinterS.G. (2002). Deliberate learning and the evolution of dynamic capabilities. Organization Science, 13(3), 339–351.
