Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Coordination mechanisms for international innovation in SMEs: effects on time-to-market and R&D task complexity as a moderator

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As SMEs increasingly internationalize their innovation activities, our study strives to improve our understanding of the coordination mechanisms that SMEs can adopt to orchestrate these activities. Building on the evolutionary theory of organizations, we link three established coordination mechanisms (centralization, formalization, and socialization) to the time-to-market of SMEs’ product innovations. We also argue that the complexity of the internationalized R&D tasks moderates the relationship between the three coordination mechanisms and time-to-market. Survey data from 103 SMEs with international innovation activities broadly support our theoretical account. With respect to the main effects, our findings suggest that a high degree of centralization tends to prolong the time-to-market, whereas formalization tends to shorten it. The moderation results further indicate that centralization can become more beneficial when a firm internationalizes highly complex R&D tasks, while formalization tends to become less beneficial with increasing task complexity. Main and moderation effects with respect to socialization are inconclusive. We discuss the implications of these findings for the academic literature and management practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We used oblique rotation because we expected the emerging factors to be theoretically related (Hair et al. 1998).

  2. Both the Bartlett test of sphericity (χ 2 = 138.577 with 15 df, p = 0.000) and the Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (MSA = 0.658) indicated the data were eligible for factor analysis. A factor was retained prior to rotation if its eigenvalue exceeded unity (Kaiser–Guttman criterion).

  3. The main effect of socialization (H3) is relatively close to the 10 %-level and the effect actually becomes significant at p < 0.10 if the full model is specified with the absolute (rather than the log-transformed) values for the two control variables firm size and firm age.

References

  • Acs, Z., & Audretsch, D. (1990). Innovation and small firms. Boston, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., Audretsch, D., & Feldman, M. (1994). R & D spillovers and recipient firm size. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 76(2), 336–340. doi:10.2307/2109888.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., Braunerhjelm, P., Audretsch, D., & Carlsson, B. (2008). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 32(1), 15–30. doi:10.1007/s11187-008-9157-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., Morck, R., Shaver, J., & Yeung, B. (1997). The internationalization of small and medium-sized enterprises: A policy perspective. Small Business Economics, 9(1), 7–20. doi:10.1023/A:1007991428526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., & Preston, L. (1997). Small and medium-sized enterprises, technology, and globalization: introduction to a special issue on small and medium-sized enterprises in the global economy. Small Business Economics, 9(1), 1–6. doi:10.1023/A:1007945327618.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. S. (1999). Building better bureaucracies. The Academy of Management Executive, 13(4), 36–46. doi:10.5465/AME.1999.2570553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adler, P. S., & Borys, B. (1996). Two types of bureaucracy: Enabling vs. coercive. Administrative Science Quarterly,. doi:10.2307/2393986.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, L., & West, S. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ambos, T. C., Andersson, U., & Birkinshaw, J. (2010). What are the consequences of initiative-taking in multinational subsidiaries? Journal of International Business Studies, 41(7), 1099–1118. doi:10.1057/jibs.2010.19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambos, B., Asakawa, K., & Ambos, T. C. (2011). A dynamic perspective on subsidiary autonomy. Global Strategy Journal, 1, 301–316. doi:10.1111/j.2042-5805.2011.00025.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambos, T. C., & Birkinshaw, J. (2010). Headquarters’ attention and its effect on subsidiary performance. Management International Review, 50(4), 449–469. doi:10.1007/s11575-010-0041-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ambos, B., & Schlegelmilch, B. B. (2007). Innovation and control in the multinational firm: A comparison of political and contingency approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 473–486. doi:10.1002/smj.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, U., Björkman, I., & Forsgren, M. (2005). Managing subsidiary knowledge creation: The effect of control mechanisms on subsidiary local embeddedness. International Business Review, 14(5), 521–538. doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2005.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersson, U., Forsgren, M., & Holm, U. (2001). Subsidiary embeddedness and competence development in MNCs a multi-level analysis. Organization Studies, 22(6), 1013–1034. doi:10.1177/0170840601226005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. (1995). Innovation and industry evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ayyagari, M., Beck, T., & Demirguc-Kunt, A. (2007). Small and medium enterprises across the globe. Small Business Economics, 29(4), 415–434. doi:10.1007/s11187-006-9002-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baker, W. E., & Sinkula, J. M. (2007). Does market orientation facilitate balanced innovation programs? An organizational learning perspective. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(4), 316–334. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00254.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barczak, G., & McDonough, E. F. (2003). Leading global product development teams. Research-Technology Management, 46(6), 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartlett, C. A., & Ghoshal, S. (1998). Managing across borders: The transnational solution (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. R., & Wally, S. (2003). Strategic decision speed and firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(11), 1107–1129. doi:10.1002/smj.343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berends, H., Jelinek, M., Reymen, I., & Stultiëns, R. (2013). Product innovation processes in small firms: Combining entrepreneurial effectuation and managerial causation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 1–20. doi:10.1111/jpim.12117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J. (1997). Entrepreneurship in multinational corporations: The characteristics of subsidiary initiatives. Strategic Management Journal, 18(3), 207–229. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199703)18:3<207:AID-SMJ864>3.0.CO;2-Q.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., & Hood, N. (1998). Multinational subsidiary evolution: Capability and charter change in foreign-owned subsidiary companies. Academy of Management Review, 23(4), 773–795. doi:10.5465/AMR.1998.1255638.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Hood, N., & Jonsson, S. (1998). Building firm-specific advantages in mulitnational corporations: The role of subsidiary initiative. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 221–241. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199803)19:33.0.CO;2-P.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., Hood, N., & Young, S. (2005). Subsidiary entrepreneurship, internal and external competitive forces, and subsidiary performance. International Business Review, 14(2), 227–248. doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2004.04.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., & Morrison, A. (1995). Configurations of strategy and structure in subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 26(4), 729–753. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Björkman, I., Barner-Rasmussen, W., & Li, L. (2004). Managing knowledge transfer in MNCs: The impact of headquarters control mechanisms. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5), 443–455. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bouquet, C., & Birkinshaw, J. (2008). Weight versus voice: How foreign subsidiaries gain attention from corporate headquarters. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3), 577–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bresman, H., Birkinshaw, J., & Nobel, R. (1999). Knowledge transfer in international acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 30(3), 439–462. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490078.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995). Product development: past research, present findings, and future directions. Academy of Management Review, 20(2), 343–378. doi:10.5465/AMR.1995.9507312922.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell, J., & Mudambi, R. (2005). MNE competence-creating subsidiary mandates. Strategic Management Journal, 26(12), 1109–1128. doi:10.1002/smj.497.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinal, L. B. (2001). Technological Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Industry: The Use of Organizational Control in Managing Research and Development. Organization Science, 12(1), 19–36. doi:10.1287/orsc.12.1.19.10119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caruana, A., Morris, M., & Vella, A. (1998). The effect of centralization and formalization on entrepreneurship in export eirms. Journal of Small Business Management, 36(1), 16–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S.-J., van Witteloostuijn, A., & Eden, L. (2010). From the Editors: Common method variance in international business research. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(2), 178–184. doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, S., Hadi, A., & Price, B. (2000). Regression analysis by example. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corredoira, R. A., & McDermott, G. A. (2014). Adaptation, bridging and firm upgrading: How non-market institutions and MNCs facilitate knowledge recombination in emerging markets. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(6), 699–722. doi:10.1057/jibs.2014.19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cosh, A., Fu, X., & Hughes, A. (2012). Organisation structure and innovation performance in different environments. Small Business Economics, 39(2), 301–317. doi:10.1007/s11187-010-9304-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crozier, M. (1964). The bureaucratic phenomenon (7th ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cyert, R., & March, J. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, R., & Lengel, R. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554–571. doi:10.1287/mnsc.32.5.554.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation organizational innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal,. doi:10.2307/256406.

    Google Scholar 

  • Di Gregorio, D., Musteen, M., & Thomas, D. E. (2009). Offshore outsourcing as a source of international competitiveness for SMEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(6), 969–988. doi:10.1057/jibs.2008.90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., & Marengo, L. (2007). Perspective-on the evolutionary and behavioral theories of organizations: A tentative roadmap. Organization Science, 18(3), 491–502. doi:10.1287/orsc.1070.0279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiegenbaum, A., & Karnani, A. (1991). Output flexibility—A competitive advantage for small firms. Strategic Management Journal, 12(2), 101–114. doi:10.1002/smj.4250120203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foss, N. J., & Pedersen, T. (2004). Organizing knowledge processes in the multinational corporation: An introduction. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5), 340–349. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frost, T. S., Birkinshaw, J., & Ensign, P. C. (2002). Centers of excellence in multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 23(11), 997–1018. doi:10.1002/smj.273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galbraith, J. (1973). Designing complex organizations. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garg, V. K., Walters, B. A., & Priem, R. L. (2003). Chief executive scanning emphases, environmental dynamism, and manufacturing firm performance. Strategic Management Journal, 24(8), 725–744. doi:10.1002/smj.335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garriga, H., Von Krogh, G., & Spaeth, S. (2013). How constraints and knowledge impact open innovation. Strategic Management Journal, 34(3), 1134–1144. doi:10.1002/smj.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gavetti, G., & Levinthal, D. A. (2004). The strategy field from the perspective of management science: Divergent strands and possible integration. Management Science, 50(10), 1309–1318. doi:10.1287/mnsc.1040.0282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Bartlett, C. A. (1988). Creation, adoption, and diffusion of innovations by subsidiaries of multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 19(3), 365–388. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., Korine, H., & Szulanski, G. (1994). Interunit communication in multinational corporations. Management Science, 40(1), 96–110. doi:10.1287/mnsc.40.1.96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greene, W. (2003). Econometric analysis. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gulati, R., Puranam, P., & Tushman, M. (2009). Strategy and the design of organizational architecture. Strategic Management Journal, 30(5), 575–576. doi:10.1002/smj.767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (1991). Knowledge flows and the structure of control within multinational corporations. Academy of Management Review, 16(4), 768–792. doi:10.5465/AMR.1991.4279628.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (2000). Knowledge flows within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 21, 473–496. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(200004)21:4<473:AID-SMJ84>3.0.CO;2-I.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., Govindarajan, V., & Malhotra, A. (1999). Feedback-seeking behavior within multinational corporations. Strategic Management Journal, 20, 205–222. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199903)20:3<205:AID-SMJ17>3.0.CO;2-H.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NY: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollenstein, H. (2005). Determinants of international activities: Are SMEs different? Small Business Economics, 24(5), 431–450. doi:10.1007/s11187-005-6455-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holm, U., & Pedersen, T. (2000). The Emergence and Impact of MNC Centres of Excellence. London: Macmillan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Karagozoglu, N., & Lindell, M. (1998). Internationalization of small and medium-sized technology-based firms: An exploratory study. Journal of Small Business Management, 36(1), 44–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kawakami, T., MacLachlan, D. L., & Stringfellow, A. (2012). New venture performance in China, Japan, and the United States: The impact of formalized market information processes. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 29(2), 275–287. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00895.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kellermanns, F. W., Eddleston, K. A., Sarathy, R., & Murphy, F. (2012). Innovativeness in family firms: A family influence perspective. Small Business Economics, 38(1), 85–101. doi:10.1007/s11187-010-9268-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerssens-van Drongelen, I. C., & Bilderbeek, J. (1999). R&D performance measurement: More than choosing a set of metrics. R and D Management, 29(1), 35–46. doi:10.1111/1467-9310.00115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keupp, M. M., Palmié, M., & Gassmann, O. (2011). Achieving subsidiary integration in international innovation by managerial “Tools”. Management International Review, 51(2), 213–239. doi:10.1007/s11575-011-0072-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keupp, M. M., Palmié, M., & Gassmann, O. (2012). The strategic management of innovation: A systematic review and paths for future research. International Journal of Management Reviews, 14(4), 367–390. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2370.2011.00321.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kieser, A., & Walgenbach, P. (2003). Organisation (4th ed.). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Pöschel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinschmidt, E. J., Brentani, U. De, & Salomo, S. (2007). Performance of global new product development programs: A resource-based view. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 419–441. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00261.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1993). Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation. Journal of International Business Studies, 24(4), 625–645. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (2003). A memoir and reflection: Knowledge and an evolutionary theory of the multinational firm 10 years later. Journal of International Business Studies, 34, 505–516. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kownatzki, M., Walter, J., Floyd, S. W., & Lechner, C. (2013). Corporate control and the speed of strategic business unit decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 56(5), 1295–1324. doi:10.5465/amj.2011.0804.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuemmerle, W. (1997). Building effective R&D capabilities abroad. Harvard Business Review, 75(2), 61–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lejarraga, J., & Martinez-Ros, E. (2014). Size, R&D productivity and decision styles. Small Business Economics, 42(3), 643–662. doi:10.1007/s11187-013-9495-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenox, M., Rockart, S., & Lewin, A. (2010). Does interdependency affect firm and industry profitability? An empirical test. Strategic Management Journal, 31, 121–139. doi:10.1002/smj.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ling, Y., Simsek, Z., Lubatkin, M., & Veiga, J. (2008). Transformational leadership’s role in promoting corporate entrepreneurship: Examining the CEO-TMT interface. Academy of Management Journal, 51(3), 557–576. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2008.32626023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2001). The internationalization and performance of SMEs. Strategic Management Journal, 22(6–7), 565–586. doi:10.1002/smj.184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, J. W., & Beamish, P. W. (2006). SME internationalization and performance: Growth vs. profitability. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, 4(1), 27–48. doi:10.1007/s10843-006-8000-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manolopoulos, D., Söderquist, K. E., & Pearce, R. (2011). Coordinating decentralized research and development laboratories: A survey analysis. Journal of International Management, 17(2), 114–129. doi:10.1016/j.intman.2010.09.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Margolis, J. D., & Molinsky, A. (2008). Navigating the bind of necessary evils: Psychological engagement and the production of interpersonally sensitive behavior. Academy of Management Journal, 51(5), 847–872. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2008.34789639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, J., & Jarillo, J. C. (1989). The evolution of research on coordination mechanisms in multinational corporations. Journal of International Business Studies, 20(3), 489–514. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez, J., & Jarillo, J. C. (1991). Coordination demands of international strategies. Jounal of International Business Studies, 22, 429–444. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mascarenhas, B. (1999). The strategies of small and large international specialists. Journal of World Business, 34(3), 252–266. doi:10.1016/S1090-9516(99)00018-8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mazzucato, M., & Parris, S. (2014). High-growth firms in changing competitive environments: The US pharmaceutical industry (1963 to 2002). Small Business Economics,. doi:10.1007/s11187-014-9583-3.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, G. A., & Corredoira, R. A. (2010). Network composition, collaborative ties, and upgrading in emerging-market firms: Lessons from the Argentine autoparts sector. Journal of International Business Studies, 41, 308–329. doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott, G. A., Corredoira, R. A., & Kruse, G. (2009). Public-private institutions as catalysts of upgrading in emerging market societies. Academy of Management Journal, 52(6), 1270–1296. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2009.47084929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Menon, A., Bharadwaj, S. G., & Howell, R. (1996). The quality and effectiveness of marketing strategy: Effects of functional and dysfunctional conflict in intra-organizational relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 24(4), 299–313. doi:10.1177/0092070396244002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mu, S., Gnyawali, D., & Hatfield, D. (2007). Foreign subsidiaries’ learning from local environments: An empirical test. Management International Review, 47, 79–102. doi:10.1007/s11575-007-0005-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R. (2008). Location, control and innovation in knowledge-intensive industries. Journal of Economic Geography, 8(5), 699–725. doi:10.1093/jeg/lbn024.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R., Mudambi, S. M., & Navarra, P. (2007). Global innovation in MNCs: The effects of subsidiary self-determination and teamwork. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24(5), 442–455. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00262.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R., & Navarra, P. (2004). Is knowledge power? Knowledge flows, subsidiary power and rent-seeking within MNCs. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(5), 385–406. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400093.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mudambi, R., & Zahra, S. A. (2007). The survival of international new ventures. Journal of International Business Studies, 38(2), 333–352. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muethel, M., Siebdrat, F., & Hoegl, M. (2012). When do we really need interpersonal trust in globally dispersed new product development teams? R&D Management, 42(1), 31–46. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2011.00667.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naldi, L., & Davidsson, P. (2014). Entrepreneurial growth: The role of international knowledge acquisition as moderated by firm age. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(5), 687–703. doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2013.08.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Narula, R. (2004). R&D collaboration by SMEs: new opportunities and limitations in the face of globalisation. Technovation, 24(2), 153–161. doi:10.1016/S0166-4972(02)00045-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R., & Winter, S. (1982). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nobel, R., & Birkinshaw, J. (1998). Innovation in multinational corporations: Control and Communication patterns in international R&D operations. Strategic Management Journal, 19, 479–496. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199805)19:5<479:AID-SMJ954>3.0.CO;2-U.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Noorderhaven, N., & Harzing, A.-W. A. (2009). Knowledge-sharing and social interaction within MNEs. Journal of International Business Studies, 40(5), 719–741. doi:10.1057/jibs.2008.106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. (1994). Psychometric Theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2005). Small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). Glossary of Statistical Terms. http://stats.oecd.org/glossary/detail.asp?ID=3123.

  • Ouchi, W. G. (1980). Markets, bureaucracies, and clans. Administrative Science Quarterly, 25(1), 129–162. doi:10.2307/2392231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmié, M., Keupp, M. M., & Gassmann, O. (2014). Pull the right levers: Creating internationally “Useful” subsidiary competence by organizational architecture. Long Range Planning, 47(1–2), 32–48. doi:10.1016/j.lrp.2013.10.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmié, M., Lingens, B., & Gassmann, O. (2015). Towards an attention-based view of technology decisions. R&D Management. doi:10.1111/radm.12146.

  • Paterson, S., & Brock, D. (2002). The development of subsidiary-management research: Review and theoretical analysis. International Business Review, 11(2), 139–163. doi:10.1016/S0969-5931(01)00053-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perols, J., Zimmermann, C., & Kortmann, S. (2013). On the relationship between supplier integration and time-to-market. Journal of Operations Management, 31(3), 153–167. doi:10.1016/j.jom.2012.11.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perrone, V., Zaheer, A., & McEvily, B. (2003). Free to be trusted? Organizational constraints on trust in boundary spanners. Organization Science, 14(4), 422–439. doi:10.1287/orsc.14.4.422.17487.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persaud, A. (2005). Enhancing synergistic innovative capability in multinational corporations: An empirical investigation. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 22, 412–429. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2005.00138.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 88, 879–903. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 531–544. doi:10.1177/014920638601200408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pugh, D., Hickson, D., Hinings, C., & Turner, C. (1968). Dimensions of organization structure. Administrative Science Quarterly, 13(1), 65–105. doi:10.2307/2391262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, G., & Li, L. (2003). Profitability of small- and medium-sized enterprises in high-tech industries: The case of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 24(9), 881–887. doi:10.1002/smj.344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reger, G. (1999). How R&D is coordinated in Japanese and European multinationals. R&D Management, 29(1), 71–88. doi:10.1111/1467-9310.00118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ross, J., & Staw, B. (1993). Organizational escalation and exit: Lessons from the Shoreham nuclear power plant. Academy of Management Journal, 36(4), 701–732. doi:10.2307/256756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R., & Dodgson, M. (1994). Innovation and size of firm. In M. Dodgson & R. Rothwell (Eds.), The handbook of industrial innovation. Aldershot Hants, UK: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (1992). A note on the transnational solution and the transaction cost theory of multinational strategic management. Journal of International Business Studies,. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rugman, A. M., & Verbeke, A. (2004). A perspective on regional and global strategies of multinational enterprises. Journal of International Business Studies, 35(1), 3–18. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400073.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salomo, S., Weise, J., & Gemünden, H. G. (2007). NPD planning activities and innovation performance: the mediating role of process management and the moderating effect of product innovativeness. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 24, 285–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shepherd, D., Patzelt, H., & Wolfe, M. (2011). Moving Forward from project failure: Negative emotions, affective commitment, and learning from the experience. Academy of Management Journal, 54(6), 1229–1259. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shimizu, K. (2007). Prospect theory, behavioral theory, and the threat-rigidity thesis: Combinative effects on organizational decisions to divest formerly acquired units. Academy of Management Journal, 50(6), 1495–1514. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2007.28226158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sidhu, J. S., Commandeur, H. R., & Volberda, H. W. (2007). The multifaceted nature of exploration and exploitation: Value of supply, demand, and spatial search for innovation. Organization Science, 18(1), 20–38. doi:10.1287/orsc.1060.0212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (2009). Hidden champions of the twenty-first century. Media. New York, NY: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Srikanth, K., & Puranam, P. (2011). Integrating distributed work: Comparing task design, communication, and tacit coordination mechanisms. Strategic Management Journal, 875, 849–875. doi:10.1002/smj.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staples, S., Hulland, J., & Higgins, C. (1998). A self-efficacy theory explanation for the management of remote workers in virtual organizations. Organization Science, 10(6), 758–776. doi:10.1287/orsc.10.6.758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sui, S., & Baum, M. (2014). Internationalization strategy, firm resources and the survival of SMEs in the export market. Journal of International Business Studies, 45(7), 821–841. doi:10.1057/jibs.2014.11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sundaram, A., & Black, J. (1992). The environment and internal organization of multinational enterprises. Academy of Management Review, 17(4), 729–757. doi:10.5465/AMR.1992.4279065.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tallman, S. (2003). The significance of Bruce Kogut’s and Udo Zander’s article, “Knowledge of the firm and the evolutionary theory of the multinational corporation”. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(6), 495–497. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tatikonda, M., & Montoya-Weiss, M. (2001). Integrating operations and marketing perspectives of product innovation: The influence of organizational process factors and capabilities on development performance. Management Science, 47(1), 151–172. doi:10.1287/mnsc.47.1.151.10669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teece, D. J. (2007). Explicating dynamic capabilities: The nature and microfoundations of (sustainable) enterprise performance. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 1319–1350. doi:10.1002/smj.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terziovski, M. (2010). Innovation practice and its performance implications in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the manufacturing sector: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 31(8), 892–902. doi:10.1002/smj.841.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D. (1967). Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, W. (2002). Social structure of “coopetition” within a multiunit organization: Coordination, competition, and intraorganizational knowledge sharing. Organization Science, 13(2), 179–190. doi:10.1287/orsc.13.2.179.536.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, K., & Makhija, M. (2006). The role of organizational controls in managing knowledge. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 197–217. doi:10.5465/AMR.2006.19379631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vachani, S. (2005). Problems of foreign subsidiaries of SMEs compared with large companies. International Business Review, 14(4), 415–439. doi:10.1016/j.ibusrev.2005.03.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verbeke, A. (2003). The evolutionary view of the MNE and the future of internalization theory. Journal of International Business Studies, 34(6), 498–504. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8400062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vernon, R. (1966). International investment and international trade in the product cycle. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 80(2), 190–207. doi:10.2307/1880689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vesey, J. (1991). The new competitors: they think in terms of “speed-to-market”. The Executive, 5(2), 23–33. doi:10.5465/AME.1991.4274671.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Von Zedtwitz, M., & Gassmann, O. (2002). Market versus technology drive in R&D internationalization: Four different patterns of managing research and development. Research Policy, 31, 569–588. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(01)00125-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vossen, R. (1998). Relative strengths and weaknesses of small firms in innovation. International Small Business Journal, 16(3), 88–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilkins, A., & Ouchi, W. (1983). Efficient cultures: Exploring the relationship between culture and organizational performance. Administrative Science Quarterly, 28(3), 468–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Q., Mudambi, R., & Meyer, K. E. (2008). Conventional and reverse knowledge flows in multinational corporations. Journal of Management, 34(5), 882–902. doi:10.1177/0149206308321546.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yetim, N., & Yetim, U. (2006). The cultural orientations of entrepreneurs and employees’ job satisfaction: The Turkish small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) case. Social Indicators Research, 77(2), 257–286. doi:10.1007/s11205-005-4851-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaltman, G., Duncan, R., & Holbek, J. (1973). Innovations and organizations. New York: Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zander, U., & Kogut, B. (1995). Knowledge and the speed of the transfer and imitation of organizational capabilities: An empirical test. Organization Science, 6(1), 76–92. doi:10.1287/orsc.6.1.76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zander, U., & Zander, L. (2010). Opening the grey box: Social communities, knowledge and culture in acquisitions. Journal of International Business Studies, 41(1), 27–37. doi:10.1057/jibs.2009.76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank SBE's editor Gerald McDermott and two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Technology Management, University of St. Gallen, Dufourstr. 40a, 9000, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Maximilian Palmié, Marco Zeschky, Stephan Winterhalter, Philipp Walter Sauter, Naomi Haefner & Oliver Gassmann

  2. IESE Business School, Barcelona, Av. Pearson 21, 08034, Barcelona, Spain

    Stephan Winterhalter

Authors
  1. Maximilian Palmié
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marco Zeschky
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephan Winterhalter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Philipp Walter Sauter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Naomi Haefner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Oliver Gassmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephan Winterhalter.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Palmié, M., Zeschky, M., Winterhalter, S. et al. Coordination mechanisms for international innovation in SMEs: effects on time-to-market and R&D task complexity as a moderator. Small Bus Econ 46, 273–294 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-015-9683-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-015-9683-8

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation