Implementation of an Idea Management System in a Global Organization: A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

(1)

IN THE FIELD OF TECHNOLOGY DEGREE PROJECT

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY AND THE MAIN FIELD OF STUDY

INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2020,

Implementation of an Idea

Management System in a Global Organization

A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

ANTONIA DÅDERMAN MALIN ÅSELIUS

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

(2)

IN THE FIELD OF TECHNOLOGY DEGREE PROJECT

DESIGN AND PRODUCT REALISATION AND THE MAIN FIELD OF STUDY INDUSTRIAL MANAGEMENT, SECOND CYCLE, 30 CREDITS STOCKHOLM SWEDEN 2020,

Implementation of an Idea

Management System in a Global Organization

A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

MALIN ÅSELIUS

ANTONIA DÅDERMAN

KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

SCHOOL OF INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT

(3)

(4)

Implementation of an Idea Management System in a Global Organization

A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

by

Antonia Dåderman Malin Åselius

Master of Science Thesis TRITA-ITM-EX 2020:145 KTH Industrial Engineering and Management

Industrial Management SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM

(5)

Implementering av ett idéhanteringssystem i en global organisation

En fallstudie inom transportindustrin

av

Antonia Dåderman Malin Åselius

Examensarbete TRITA-ITM-EX 2020:145 KTH Industriell teknik och management

Industriell ekonomi och organisation SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM

(6)

Master of Science Thesis TRITA-ITM-EX 2020:145

Implementation of an Idea Management System in a Global Organization

A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

Antonia Dåderman Malin Åselius

Approved

2020-06-08

Examiner

Bo Karlsson

Supervisor

Lars Uppvall

Commissioner

Scania

Contact person

Adina Manisor

Abstract

Disruptive changes driven by sustainability, new technology and servitization challenge companies’ current products and business models. This increases the interest in radical innovations, and consequently the interest to capture radical ideas. At the same time, globalization increases the importance for digital tools in order to connect and communicate between different geographical locations. An idea management system (IMS) allows large, global companies to conduct idea management in a structured way throughout the entire company.

This study aims to investigate and identify factors important for the implementation of an IMS in companies that operates globally. This is done with a case study at a company in the automotive industry who is standing before an industrial transformation. In order to analyze the empirical findings two existing frameworks is combined into an empirical classification framework. The previous literature and the empirical analysis identified three important themes; process, culture and system.

The discussion around the three themes allowed for a connection between the empirical findings and the previous literature, leading to conclusions regarding the implementation of an IMS. The study firstly concludes that finding ideas is no problem, it is more important to have the right processes in place for handling ideas. One of the key aspects is individual motivation and that the system is used for learning rather than performing.

A risk identified was that goals within large companies may conflict with goals of radical innovation, which highlights the importance of flexible leadership and flexible systems within the company. The IMS should start with basic features and start at selected markets, allowing feedback from the IMS ambassadors to assist in the future development of the system. Categorizing ideas and using monthly campaigns for specific problem areas can facilitate the handling of a large number of ideas, preventing the IMS from becoming a “black hole” where ideas are submitted and then disappear.

Key-words: Idea Management System, Idea Management, Culture, Process, Global Organization, Innovation, Radical Innovation

(7)

Examensarbete TRITA-ITM-EX 2020:145

Implementering av ett idéhanteringssystem i en global organisation

En fallstudie inom transportindustrin

Antonia Dåderman Malin Åselius

Godkänt

2020-06-08

Examinator

Bo Karlsson

Handledare

Lars Uppvall

Uppdragsgivare

Scania

Kontaktperson

Adina Manisor

Sammanfattning

Hållbarhet, ny teknologi och tjänstefiering är förändringar som utmanar dagens företags produktutbud och affärsmodeller. Intresset för radikala innovationer har i och med det ökat och som en konsekvens av det, även bidragit med ett ökat intresse av att fånga radikala idéer inom organisationen. Samtidigt har globaliseringen ökat betydelsen av digitala verktyg för anknytning och kommunikation mellan olika geografiska platser. Ett idéhanteringssystem (förkortning IMS) möjliggör strukturerad idéhantering genom hela företaget, för stora globala företag.

Målet med studien var att undersöka och identifiera faktorer som anses viktiga för implementering av ett idéhanteringssystem i stora globala företag. Detta har gjorts genom en fallstudie på ett företag inom fordonsindustrin, som står inför en stor industriell förändring. För att analysera den insamlade empiriska datan har två existerande ramverk kombinerats till ett ramverk för empirisk klassificering. Tidigare litteratur och den empiriska analysen identifierade tre viktiga teman: process, kultur och system.

Diskussionen kring dessa tre teman möjliggjorde för kopplingar mellan de empiriska fynden och tidigare litteratur, vilket gav slutsatser angående implementeringen av ett idéhanteringssystem. En av studiens första slutsatser var att mängden idéer inom en organisation inte är ett problem. Det är viktigare att ha processer på plats för att hantera idéerna. En av nyckelaspekterna var att individuell motivation och att systemet bör användas för lärande snarare än prestation.

En risk med målsättning identifierades, det visade att mål hos stora företag kan strida mot mål för radikala innovationer, vilket lyfter vikten av ett flexibelt ledarskap och flexibla system inom företaget. I startfasen bör idéhanteringssystemet satsa på grundläggande funktioner och testas hos utvalda marknader, vilket möjliggör utveckling av systemet genom återkoppling från systemets ambassadörer. Månatliga kampanjer och kategorisering av idéer underlättar hanteringen av stora mängder idéer, vilket motverkar att idéhanteringssystemet blir ett ”svart hål” där idéer skickas in och försvinner.

Nyckelord: Idéhanteringssystem, Idéhantering, Kultur, Process, Global organisation, Innovation, Radikal innovation

(8)

List of Figures

1.1 Building blocks of Idea Management (Kulakauskaite, 2020) . . . 2

2.1 The innovation ambition matrix, showing novelty of products and services, and markets (Nagji & Tuff, 2012) . . . 8

3.1 Possible requirements for an idea management system (Summa, 2004) . . 15

4.1 The creativity canvas for knowledge and idea management, with nine building blocks (Naggar, 2015) . . . 20

4.2 A SWOT matrix (Paul et al., 2010) . . . 21

5.1 Overview of the research process . . . 25

5.2 Overview of the data analysis process . . . 28

6.1 Values of the case company . . . 34

(12)

List of Tables

1.1 The disposition of the report, with a short description of each chapter . . 4

4.1 Explanation of the nine building blocks (Naggar, 2015) . . . 20

4.2 The Empirical Classification Framework based on the Creativity Canvas and SWOT analysis . . . 22

5.1 Specifications of interviews . . . 26

5.2 Codewords used for the coding of the interviews . . . 28

7.1 Key findings from the comparison between the empirical findings from the head office and the markets . . . 46

9.1 Best- and worst-case scenario for the IMS . . . 59

B.1 Selected strengths from the empirical findings . . . 73

B.2 Selected weakness from the empirical findings . . . 77

B.3 Selected opportunities from the empirical findings . . . 82

B.4 Selected threats from the empirical findings . . . 87

(13)

Acronyms

BM business model

BMC business model canvas HCI human computer interaction IMS idea management system MNC multinational corporations

(14)

Acknowledgements

The two authors of this thesis are enrolled at different programs but study the same master program in Industrial Management at the Royal Institute of Technology. Therefore, there are two front pages one for each program.

We want to take the opportunity to thank Scania CV AB for including us to the team while writing our master thesis. A warm thank you to everyone who took their time and participated in the interviews. A special thanks to Adina Manisor, who have been our supervisor. Thank you for all your support, all your knowledge and multiple perspectives to the subject. We would also like to thank Daniel Franzén for the willingness to help us and encouraging us to go further and deeper within the subject.

We would like to express our appreciation to our supervisor Professor Lars Uppvall at the Royal Institute of Technology. For guiding us through the thesis, answering our questions and giving us the academic perspective, thank you! Thank you to Professor Peter Sjödin for being supportive and providing feedback to the research area and research question.

We want to thank our examiner Professor Bo Karlsson at the Royal Institute of Technology. Thank you to Professor Thomas Westin for being active in the process and for giving feedback and support.

We would also like to take the time and say a large thank you to everyone who has listened to our thoughts, given us support and provided feedback throughout the process.

Antonia Dåderman & Malin Åselius Stockholm, June 2020

(15)

Chapter 1 Introduction

This chapter presents the background to the thesis. The introduction also covers problem background, purpose, research question, delimitation, and the disposition of the report.

1.1 Background

Innovation is an essential part of an organization and is often related to successful performance (Anderson & Zhou, 2014; Jiménez-Jiménez & Sanz-Valle, 2011) and an important source for competitive advantage (Jiménez-Jiménez & Sanz-Valle, 2011).

According a report conducted by the consultancy firm McKinsey (2015), 80% of executives think their current business models are at risk for disruption within the near future, and 84% believe that their future success is dependent on innovation. Therefore, innovation can be viewed as necessary for the future and should be prioritized. However, only 6% of the same executives are satisfied with their innovation performance (McKinsey, 2015). In a study made by PwC (2017), 54% of innovative organizations have trouble bridging the gap between innovation strategy and the broader business strategy.

An industry’s transformation is often associated with the adoption of new technology (Yablonsky, 2018). Adapting to new technology often requires efforts and resources from the company, and it challenges the business’ structural, cultural, and organizational boundaries (Yablonsky, 2018). Alongside the rapid technological development and the trend of servitization as a complementary product offering, there is a need for defined innovation strategies and processes in order to sustain long-term competitiveness (Baines

(16)

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

et al., 2009). Disruptive changes in society and technologies put pressure on companies to adapt. Other factors affecting change for companies include competitors or changed legislation (Tushman & O’Reilly, 1996).

With the globalization of large corporations, digital tools grow increasingly important in order to easily connect and communicate (Alexe et al., 2014). With the right digital system, an organization receives the opportunity to conduct idea generation and selection in a structured and efficient manner (Kornish & Hutchison‐Krupat, 2017).

An idea management system (IMS) is a software with the purpose to facilitate the management of innovation (Westerski et al., 2011). During the past decade the growth of idea management systems has become a promising branch of the computer software market (Burton & Walker, 2015). This has resulted in companies moving from analog to digital structures to manage their innovation, and with the use of software, new possibilities are opening up (Frishammar et al., 2019).

While ideas are a significant source of value creation (Baumann & Stieglitz, 2014), how to handle them can be captured under the concept of idea management which is a structured process of managing the ideas to innovations (Brem & Voigt, 2007). In Figure 1.1, the three identified building blocks of idea management are shown.

Figure 1.1: Building blocks of Idea Management (Kulakauskaite, 2020)

The definitions of what innovation is are many and vary in wording. However, the broad definition comes from the Latin meaning of the word ”Innovate” which means to make something new.

This area has later been developed into frameworks, processes and guidelines for how to develop, create and build innovative businesses (Tidd & Bessant, 2013). Scholars describe innovation as a result of recombination of knowledge, e.g. Nelson and Winter (1982) and

(17)

Davis and Eisenhardt (2011). For this thesis, the following definition of innovation is proposed by combining different definitions presented in the book by Tidd and Bessant (2013): ”Innovation is a recombination of knowledge and successful exploitation of new ideas that results in new value propositions that contribute to the business operation and offering.”

1.2 Problem Background

Companies within the automotive industry stands before disruptive changes due to a rapid technology development. Interesting technologies are among others electrification and autonomous driving. New technologies have the prospect of having a major impact on the industry and will affect both products and business models. A raised interest in innovation work has been noticed, especially the work with radical innovations. Where the aim is to find new product offerings that will generate in new revenue streams.

When companies operate in a global setting, they face challenges related to implementing processes for innovation, handling emerging ideas in the organization, and fostering an innovative climate across multiple geographical locations. There could also be different perspectives in regards for innovation between the head office and the markets.

1.3 Purpose

The purpose of this study is to investigate challenges related to internal innovation processes and innovation culture, within the head office and markets, in a global company.

This includes investigating the process, and how to create the right prerequisites, for implementing an innovation management system. The aim is to find factors and provide suggestions on what to consider when implementing an idea management system.

1.4 Research Question

To reach the aim of the thesis, the following research question will be investigated and answered:

”What factors are important to consider for a global company when implementing an idea management system for fostering internal innovations?”

(18)

1.5 Delimitations

During the writing of this thesis, the focus will be on the front-end of innovation, meaning the idea-collection process and how to sort out which ideas should be developed into projects. There will be a focus on idea management, with process, culture and system considered as equally important parts. The thesis is also delimited to large and global companies, with teams spread geographically. The thesis covers radical innovations with a time horizon for implementation of one to two years. This is because ideas leading to this type of innovation is desired when facing disruptive changes in the industry.

1.6 Disposition

The disposition of the conducted research is presented in Table 1.1. The table provides an overview and a brief description of each chapter in the outline of the report.

Table 1.1: The disposition of the report, with a short description of each chapter

(19)

Chapter 2 Idea Management Process and Culture

This chapter is intended to provide a theoretical foundation in the idea management process and culture for this study. The review will cover structural innovation and recombining knowledge, idea management, organizational ambidexterity, and culture for innovation.

2.1 Structural Innovation and Recombining Knowledge

Innovation is often described as a result of recombining knowledge (Davis & Eisenhardt, 2011; Nelson & Winter, 1982). In order to recombine knowledge, knowledge must be shared within an organization, and this can be especially challenging for organizations existing in different geographic locations (Mäkelä et al., 2012). An area within innovation is structural innovation which is defined by Howells and Edler (2011) as ”...covering new, innovative forms of institutional, governance and configurational relationships within an innovation system” (Howells & Edler, 2011).

Powell et al. (1996) suggests that when the knowledge within an organization is expanding, innovation will occur in learning networks. Therefore, organizations who focus on structural innovation including expanding knowledge, creating new networks and new configurational relationships have an advantage when it comes to innovation.

(20)

CHAPTER 2. IDEA MANAGEMENT PROCESS AND CULTURE

2.1.1 Knowledge Networks

Many researchers argue that organizational embeddedness in knowledge networks increases innovation (Belso-Martinez & Diez-Vial, 2018; Wang et al., 2014). However, according to Berry (2018), less attention has been given in research to knowledge networks within multinational corporations (MNC). The results from Berry’s (2018) report shows that the embeddedness of knowledge networks in host-countries and third countries has a positive relationship with the level of radical innovation. This suggests that knowledge networks who involve countries other than the country where the company was founded will produce more radical innovations.

In organizations, the number of personal contacts that an employee has and the interaction with others in the network is called network centrality (Marsden, 2015).

Reinholt et al. (2011) argues that network centrality is a proper measurement of an individual employees’ opportunity to engage in knowledge sharing. Their study also shows that this factor is positively related to engagement in knowledge sharing.

In a study by Laursen et al. (2012), results showed that up to a certain point, personal contacts and social capital is related to the probability of involvement in global markets.

A company needs to encourage knowledge-based relationships where learning is in focus to enhance innovation (Delgado‐Verde et al., 2011). However, the relationships tend to be internal rather than external, research show that external knowledge-based relationships have a significant impact on radical innovation (Delgado‐Verde et al., 2011).

Therefore, global companies should aim to have employees building relationships outside the company as well as inside and focus on knowledge sharing and learning to facilitate an innovative climate further.

2.2 Idea Management

Ideas are a major source of value creation (Baumann & Stieglitz, 2014) and idea management is a process within innovation management with the goal of achieving

”...effective and efficient idea generation, evaluation and selection” (Brem & Voigt, 2007).

An increased idea generation is not automatically the same as increased innovation (Charles & Chucks, 2012). Instead, according to Boeddrich (2004), it is important to have sustainable and methodical processes for reviewing and implementing ideas. Good ideas are usually not the bottleneck in large organizations (Baumann & Stieglitz, 2014).

(21)

Instead, it is often a lack of resources and structure that prevents an organization from implementing an increased number of valuable ideas (Lippman & Rumelt, 2003). Keum and See (2017) suggest that organizations should consider whether idea generation or idea selection is the most important for their individual performance.

In a study by Škerlavaj et al. (2014), it is shown that if employees perceive the leadership as supportive, the potential of creative individuals can be unlocked. This is also stated to support the organization in implementing creative ideas (Škerlavaj et al., 2014).

According to Frishammar et al. (2019), there are two types of managerial errors in idea management; overlooked opportunities and underestimated challenges. Both of these can lead to loss of competitive advantage. Leadership therefore needs to be supportive and encourage a creative mindset among employees to facilitate the innovative culture.

In radical innovation projects, issues regarding goal ambiguity and problems with bureaucracy are likely to show due to the uncertainty connected to radical innovations (Pihlajamaa, 2017). Pihlajamaa (2017) also mentions that projects for radical innovations often have to fight for resources and respect from the organization. The innovation ambition matrix, seen in Figure 2.1, provides two large benefits for managers. Firstly, managers can survey innovation initiatives with the number of investments in each category. Secondly, managers can discuss the company’s innovation portfolio and the overall ambition. (Nagji & Tuff, 2012)

In Figure 2.1, the horizontal axis presents the novelty of a company’s products and services, and the vertical axis presents the level of customer markets. Between the axes are three levels core, adjacent and transformational (Nagji & Tuff, 2012). Where core relates to continuous improvements for the company on products and services that already exists, while adjacent is initiatives that are slightly new to the company but connected to the current business. It could be expanding to an adjacent market or launch complementary products/services to existing products/services. The third level is transformational which is the development of new product/services or create new markets or target new customers.

The ratio between the different levels are individual for every company, however accordingly to Nagji and Tuff (2020) the ratio 70-20-10 is a good aim. Where 70% of the resources are placed on core projects, 20% on adjacent and 10% on transformational projects (Nagji & Tuff, 2020).

(22)

Figure 2.1: The innovation ambition matrix, showing novelty of products and services, and markets (Nagji & Tuff, 2012)

2.2.1 Searching for Ideas in Global Organizations

The search for new ideas can be done both exploitative and exploratory where exploitative is within the organizations’ frame, and exploratory goes beyond that frame (Nicholas et al., 2013). Further explanations of exploitation and exploration can be found in section 2.3. The innovation space is the space where the current innovation of the company is conducted. The change from exploitative to exploratory search is related to a reframing of the company’s innovation space this comes with a risk. Nicholas et al. (2013) has identified four challenges when reframing the innovation space:

The lamppost problem means only searching under the lamppost where the light is because it is easier than searching in the dark. In order to find radical innovations, searching needs to be conducted in the dark.

The messenger problem relates to the lamppost problem. When innovations from

”the darkness” are brought back into the organization, these might be discarded or reinterpreted. The challenge lies in assimilating ideas productively.

The rewiring problem is the challenge of creating new networks. Already existing networks will not help to search in the new frame. Therefore, new networks need to be created.

(23)

The balancing problem is the challenge to balance demands on resources. There needs to be a balance between maintaining performance by searching for incremental ideas and the search for radical innovations that can perform in the future.

The increase of digital technologies allows for new stakeholders to take an active part in the development of the company (Frishammar et al., 2019). This imposes challenges on the innovation process in managing and supporting ideas from a variety of sources (Frishammar et al., 2019). However, an idea management system can help the organization in meeting the demand with large quantity of ideas and transparent communication (Gerlach & Brem, 2017).

To increase the quality of submitted ideas, Froehlich et al. (2016) suggest that employees should be taught the value of ideas with experiential proximity. This means to use own experiences to find innovation. With recombining knowledge more experience and knowledge can be used to find radical innovative ideas. The biggest challenge in searching for ideas in a global organization is not to generate a large volume of ideas but choosing the right ones (Rietzschel et al., 2010).

2.2.2 Idea Selection

Idea selection is a task in prediction, even if proper selection criteria are clear the predictions are hard (Kornish & Hutchison‐Krupat, 2017). A study by Zhu et al.

(2017) shows that processing ideas intuitively outperforms a deliberate process. When selecting ideas intuitively, both originality and usefulness were valued, in comparison to the deliberate selection where only usefulness was assessed. There are a variety of suggestions in the literature on how successful idea selection is conducted. Gabriel et al.

(2016) state that in successful decision-making, ideas are linked to contextual knowledge.

The degree of elaboration of ideas should be considered by managers, and this can be enhanced by tools provided in an idea management system (Beretta, 2019).

This can be connected to the importance of active knowledge networks where employees become more creative and generate radical ideas when sharing knowledge with internal and external parties. One issue in idea selection can be a tendency to promote one’s own interests (Keum & See, 2017). Another issue is that a large number of ideas can make selection harder (Kornish & Hutchison‐Krupat, 2017), simply due to the increased amount of manual work.

(24)

2.3 Organizational Ambidexterity

For companies, the balance between exploration and exploitation is important for organizational performance and this balance is called organizational ambidexterity (Jansen et al., 2012; March, 1991; Raisch et al., 2009; Wei et al., 2014), which was first mentioned by March (1991). Exploration is when the knowledge that can be seen as new to the organization is attained, and exploitation is when current knowledge is used (Tidd & Bessant, 2013). Apart from enhancing overall performance, organizational ambidexterity is also shown to increase innovation performance (Popadić et al., 2015) and sales growth (He & Wong, 2004). Therefore, companies should aim to balance exploration and exploitation to reach an organization ambidexterity which will lead to a balanced future innovation strategy.

2.3.1 Ambidextrous Leadership

To reach organizational ambidexterity an important aspect is ambidextrous leadership.

In an analysis conducted by Rosing et al. (2011) shows that ambidextrous leadership, where priorities in goal can shift in order to respond to challenges in the innovation process, are beneficial for idea generation. This is also confirmed in an article by Alexander and Van Knippenberg (2014). Barczak et al. (2009) state that goal assignment is an area of improvement for many companies. There is a risk that goals for radical innovation development are conflicting goals for incremental improvements. Incremental improvements tend to be dominant in large firms (Andriopoulos & Lewis, 2009).

One solution to this is conducting a structural separation between exploitation and exploration, which can increase motivation by reducing goal conflicts (Pihlajamaa, 2017).

2.3.2 Enhancing Organizational Ambidexterity

Exploration and exploitation need to complement each other (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004; Popadić et al., 2015), and therefore there is no need for organizations to focus solely on one of them (Gibson & Birkinshaw, 2004). Having a supportive cultural context in the organization enhances the capacity for both exploration and exploitation (Gibson &

Birkinshaw, 2004). Another description of a culture that enhances ambidexterity is a culture that is both tight and loose at the same time, where strategy flows bottom-up, but expectations of performance is high (Tushman & O’Reilly, 1996). Another article

(25)

mentions that organizational control and support assists the progress of organizational ambidexterity (Günsel et al., 2018), confirming the findings from the article by Tushman and O’Reilly (1996).

The use of multiple management control systems, rather than one, can lead to successful organizational ambidexterity (Gschwantner & Hiebl, 2016). Exploration can be increased or fostered by systems that are interactive (McCarthy & Gordon, 2011) and creative (Gschwantner & Hiebl, 2016), while exploitation requires a more restrictive use (Gschwantner & Hiebl, 2016). The balance between exploration and exploitation is not a static problem since it is dependent on many factors, both internal and external.

Examples being the size and age of the department and external factors like demand and competition in the industry. (McCarthy & Gordon, 2011)

If a company chooses to only focus on exploration or exploitation, it is important that the strategy fits the company culture. When focus and culture match, it has been shown to increase the speed and quality of the innovation. However, when the innovation strategy is ambidextrous, the match with culture is not shown to have the same benefits.

An explanation for this could be that organizations choosing this strategy operates in a highly dynamic and competitive setting, resulting in a focus on adapting to changes from the external environment through management rather than changing the culture.

This suggests that matching the organizational culture with an ambidextrous strategy is difficult and requires an extensive amount of time. (Chen et al., 2018)

2.4 Culture for Innovation

There is an increasing understanding that culture is a key driver for innovation (Meissner

& Sprenger, 2011). Meissner and Sprenger (2011) have identified a gap in research on the connection between culture and processes within innovation. Learning within an organization can be a result of employees sharing their knowledge (Huber, 1991) and engagement in knowledge sharing is high when motivation, ability to share knowledge, and network centrality is high (Reinholt et al., 2011).

Managing motivation of the individual is an important part of radical innovation capability (Pihlajamaa, 2017), and a lack of motivation has been identified as a key obstacle for radical innovation (Alexander & Van Knippenberg, 2014; Bank & Raza, 2014). Motivation can be either extrinsic or intrinsic (Deci & Ryan, 1985) and in relation

(26)

to contribution in knowledge sharing, the relation varies for the two types (Frey et al., 2011). Extrinsic motivation is when participation in an activity is driven by a goal, for example, a reward (Deci & Ryan, 1985), and intrinsic motivation is when participation is driven by interest or pleasure (Deci, 1975). Frey et al. (2011) found that there is a positive relationship between intrinsic motivation and the number of contributions to a knowledge network.

According to a study conducted by (Lin, 2007) companies should be careful using extrinsic motivations for encouraging knowledge sharing, since this only will lead to temporary compliance. Learning and development is a part of the radical innovation process (Alexander & Van Knippenberg, 2014). Alexander and Van Knippenberg (2014) also states that when radical innovation is the goal, a team is more likely to pursue it if they are encouraged to focus on learning rather than performing. There are characteristics of the development of radical innovations which can make it challenging to maintain individual motivation, compared to incremental innovation development (Pihlajamaa, 2017). Incremental innovation is easier to measure and see progress while for radical innovation it is connected to the lamppost problem mentioned earlier, where searching in the dark is necessary to find radical innovations.

A collaborative idea management culture encourages employees to work collaboratively in solving problems and can help an organization in fostering innovations by using collective creativity and create engagement in business innovation across the organization (Bank &

Raza, 2014). According to Baines et al. (2009), an essential step for companies moving from physical products to services is that the culture needs to become customer-centric rather than product-centric.

(27)

Chapter 3 Idea Management System

In this chapter, specific details about the idea management system will be explained. It will go through ideal requirements and advantages and disadvantages with the methods of an idea management system.

3.1 Using an Idea Management System

New technology can provide organizations with new ways of conducting idea generation and selection and facilitate the process in a global environment (Kornish &

Hutchison‐Krupat, 2017). An idea management system (IMS) is a digital system with the aim to collect ideas and structure innovation from large communities (Westerski et al., 2013). During the past decade, the market for idea management systems has grown and are considered a promising branch of the computer software market (Burton & Walker, 2015).

The goal of an IMS is to integrate it into a central element of the innovation pipeline and use it as a collaborative system (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). This means that the innovation pipeline is a centralized database with all submitted ideas (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). The IMS is then used as a central tool to categorize the ideas and provide feedback which result in the system becoming a central element of the innovation pipeline and can collect and structure ideas.

When it comes to IMS and ambidexterity, it has been shown that if the innovation management team provides a well-designed IMS and integrate processes with supportive infrastructure, the desired ambidexterity will be reached (Wan et al., 2017). According

(28)

CHAPTER 3. IDEA MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

to Alexe et al. (2014) idea management technology is crucial for the successful implementation of an innovation strategy in large, global corporations.

The aim of an IMS should be to spread the message that every employee has important ideas that are valuable for the company and the innovation management team (Alexander

& Van Knippenberg, 2014; Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). The aim should also be to reach outside the company, in order to gain the perspective of suppliers, customers and other stakeholders (Alexe et al., 2014).

The level of openness of the system will also affect organizational ambidexterity. This refers to the open and closed innovation, where closed innovation means to only have selected people working on innovation (Tidd & Bessant, 2013). While open innovation implies to receives influences and idea from a larger community (Tidd & Bessant, 2013).

If the open approach is used in the IMS, it can increase the rate of innovation conducted on, and around, the system. (Boudreau, 2010) It has been shown that using an IMS can increase the individual knowledge diversity within the company and recombining knowledge will positively affect the number of contributions to the system (Frey et al., 2011).

3.2 Ideal Requirements

The implementation of an IMS is done as a process supported by software and a group of process experts, together with the support of the management team and the employees’

engagement (Alexe et al., 2014). The implementations may differ between the systems;

often the basic requirements support submitting ideas, comment function, the ability to score ideas, as well as browsing and searching (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). According to Bailey and Horvitz (2010), every organization needs to customize the functions in an IMS, to complement its innovation strategy. The ideal functions are unique for every company and it is recommended to start off simple and gradually build more advanced features. The spectrum for advancements within an IMS can vary significantly between different suppliers, or if the company decides to create and implement their own (Summa, 2004).

Before the digitization era companies often used a physical box to collect ideas from employees. This has advanced into a digital idea box, that today can be exchanged for a complex system with numerous features. (Alexe et al., 2014) The transition to an IMS

(29)

opens up new possibilities for innovating gradually and continuously (Frishammar et al., 2019). According to Westerski et al. (2013), the notion behind the systems originates from the simple suggestion boxes. However, it has transformed into more sophisticated processes.

Depending on the expected outcome, and the set strategy, the ideal requirements differ (Alexe et al., 2014). In Figure 3.1 an overview of further suggested requirements for an IMS are shown (Summa, 2004).

Figure 3.1: Possible requirements for an idea management system (Summa, 2004)

Bailey and Horvitz (2010) states that in order for employees to participate incentives need to be implemented and there are different models which can be applied. Popular examples are reputation systems, point-based systems, and social rewards. One popular method has been monetary compensation. The most important aspect is individual motivation and like mentioned earlier Pihlajamaa (2017) individual motivation is crucial for the long- term innovation work. According to Frey et al. (2011) a positive relationship between motivation driven by interest or pleasure and contribution to a knowledge network. It should be noted that it is not necessary to only use one method and that monetary compensation is not always necessary (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010)

3.2.1 Measurement of Success

Idea management is about systematically gathering ideas, to find new important concepts that can generate tangible and intangible benefits for the organization (Alexe et al., 2014).

It is easy to measure the number of submitted ideas and ideas that proceeded into a pilot projects and in an IMS (Alexe et al., 2014). A challenge is how to measure the soft progress of the work, everything cannot be measured in numbers.

(30)

The success of the innovation work can also be judged by functions or products that generate new revenue streams. According to a case study of implemented idea management systems done at Microsoft, Starbucks and Dell, by Bailey and Horvitz (2010), it was clear that three additional outcomes should be measured.

• Workforce ideation skills

• Feeling of contribution or being less ”siloed”

• Cross-pollination of ideas

Measurement of the workforce ideation skills and the feeling of contribution can be done by asking employees in annual surveys about their skills and feelings of contribution (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). The progress can then be tracked to measure the advancement of soft skills. To measure cross-pollination, the aim is to find which ideas influenced each other. This could be measured by using the number of sources included in internal documents and have submitted ideas reference ideas and people that influenced the submission in the IMS (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010).

3.2.2 Design Choices

The design of the IMS can be sensitive to design choices, as different designs may influence the participation rate among the employees (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). Each system needs to be adapted after the specific company and its purpose. Therefore, it is crucial to study the interaction and level of participation and to gradually tailor and improve the system for the desired innovation purpose (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). The design is often complex and interesting from the perspective of human computer interaction (HCI) since certain design choices can benefit the community with support for submitting, discussing, scoring, and choosing ideas (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010).

It is important to have continuous communication and feedback; otherwise research suggests that the idea submissions can fail (Alexe et al., 2014). Because of lack of interaction from the system and users lose interest (Alexe et al., 2014). It is important that the system aligns with the predefined processes and structure of the company, so it become a natural part of users’ everyday work.

Deciding what criteria framework to have for submitting an idea is a balance between quantity and quality. Without any framework, it is easier to submit ideas and can result in a full innovation pipeline without much quality.

(31)

Therefore, the innovation management team can slightly raise the bar for the framework for submitting an idea to reach the individual balance for a company. Resulting in smaller volume of ideas but with higher quality (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010).

3.3 Advantages and Disadvantages

The IMS has developed from collecting ideas from employees into becoming a collaborative improvement system where ideas can be assessed, provided feedback and structured according to predefined processes within the company (Monteiro et al., 2010;

Westerski et al., 2011). With the use of an IMS, there are several advantages, but one should also be aware of the disadvantages. One of the most significant advantages is the ability to reach employees globally and gather ideas into a centralized database and use it as an innovation pipeline (Alexe et al., 2014). This results in a possibility for innovation managers to be more effective and to evaluate the submitted ideas and choose the ones with the highest potential (Alexe et al., 2014).

In a systematic literature review conducted by Monteiro et al. (2010) evidence showed that the use of an IMS accelerates the idea management process, reduce the cost, enhance collaboration and communication, help obtain better decision quality, provides knowledge management support, reduces risk with patents, and enhances creativity (Monteiro et al., 2010). The ability to capture and assess ideas faster than other competitors can create a competitive advantage since the length of the product life cycle becomes shorter.

With an IMS the organization can inspire employees to focus on specific business issues and generate ideas towards this purpose (Alexe et al., 2014). It can be called a campaign which is time limited and during this time only ideas solving a specific business problem is accepted. This will educate users about problems and facilitate the solution when employees globally are working solving the issue. In a study by Falco et al. (2017), the use of an IMS for collaborative innovation purposes carries a variety of positive consequences, listed below.

• Effective mechanisms for coordination

• A standardized collaboration behavior

• Reducing of uncertainty and ambiguity related to the collaborative process

• Decreased costs for the search for novel ideas, storage, coordination and distribution

(32)

Even though there are many upsides to using a system for handling the innovation, a fundamental problem is still that a significant amount of human effort is needed during the idea management process (Westerski et al., 2013). Based on testimonials from IMS vendors and case studies of various companies, the main origins of problems are: a large volume of submitted ideas, sudden peaks of submissions, redundancy of ideas, and large quantities of trivial ideas (Jouret, 2009; Westerski et al., 2013). A problem with the systems is the difficulty to depict distinctive features, criteria framework and management team. Being able to accurately and rapidly enough assess the ideas and chose the right ones (Westerski et al., 2013).

Another undesired outcome of a system is the commenting and voting functions, one issue could be that ideas submitted early will receive more attention than ideas submitted later in the process (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). One possible solution for this is to have brainstorming sessions. This has shown to be a practical approach to structuring the ideation phase, where defined periods are set for submitting, commenting, refining and voting on ideas (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010). This would help ensure that each idea receives equal attention and has an equal opportunity to be refined before being evaluated again (Bailey & Horvitz, 2010).

Even though there are both positive and negative consequences to be aware of, if a large company is working across several geographical locations and aims for radical innovations an idea management system is necessary to handle the volume of ideas, structuring ht process and to facilitate the idea management.

(33)

Chapter 4 Theoretical Frameworks

In this chapter, the theoretical frameworks are presented and explained. The frameworks used are the Creativity Canvas and the SWOT-analysis. The two frameworks are combined into a conceptual framework named Empirical Classification Framework that will be used for the collected empirical data to facilitate the analysis.

4.1 The Creativity Canvas

The creativity canvas is based on the business model canvas (BMC) by Osterwalder et al. (2010) but instead customized to knowledge and idea management as proposed by (Naggar, 2015). The BMC is a tool built on nine predetermined blocks and is often used to redesign the business model (BM) with the goal to create strategic alternatives. In Figure 4.1 the nine building blocks from Osterwalder et al. (2010) is used and adapted to knowledge and idea management within an organization (Naggar, 2015). The nine- building blocks are presented and further explained in Table 4.1.

The creativity canvas allows for the creation of a coherent ecosystem which is based on stakeholder interests. Using this approach is argued to overcome obstacles related to knowledge and idea management, including unwillingness, effort, and motivation.

(Naggar, 2015) In order to fulfil the purpose of this study, strategic alternatives for an IMS that capture innovative ideas need to be created. The proposed creativity canvas provides the needed, structured way of designing such a strategic framework.

(34)

CHAPTER 4. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

Figure 4.1: The creativity canvas for knowledge and idea management, with nine building blocks (Naggar, 2015)

Table 4.1: Explanation of the nine building blocks (Naggar, 2015) Building Block Explanation

Key Partners External members that share their knowledge, ideas and point of view. An example could be a creativity expert.

Key Activities Activities related to idea and knowledge generation.

Examples being, generation of ideas or acquiring new knowledge.

Key Resources Key resources include innovation communities, collaboration platforms, community steering teams, and creativity tools.

Value Proposition Stakeholders needs sufficient benefits in order to participate in activities voluntary.

Relationships The relationship between stakeholders and the idea and knowledge management system. Also the relationships between stakeholders, solidified by trust networks.

Channels Communities and where stakeholders can find new ideas.

Customer Segment The profiles and motivations of stakeholders.

Cost Structure Middleground activities and associated resources.

Revenue Designing the system so that financing for the system comes naturally from the projects evolving in the system.

(35)

4.2 SWOT-Analysis

SWOT is an acronym of Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats, and is a tool used to identify and analyze enhancers and obstacles, both internal and external, within an organization (Leigh, 2010). SWOT is often presented in a two-by-two matrix (Paul et al., 2010), see Figure 4.2 below.

Figure 4.2: A SWOT matrix (Paul et al., 2010)

SWOT was first mentioned in 1982, in an article by Weirich, who introduced the tool as a framework for conducting strategic planning (Weihrich, 1982). Historically, the SWOT-analysis has been widely used in multiple different sectors (Ghazinoory et al., 2011). This type of analysis is most commonly used for market research and business strategy development, where the factors in business strategy development are built from soft, perceptual data rather than hard extant data (Leigh, 2010).

The most important benefits of the framework are its simplicity (Ghazinoory et al., 2011;

Pickton & Wright, 1998) and practicality (Pickton & Wright, 1998). Over the year’s criticism has also been raised towards it, for example for lacking a ranking hierarchy (Coman & Ronen, 2009). Pickton and Wright (1998) states that it could lead to strategic errors and that a possible solution is combining it with another framework in order to get a more detailed analysis. Coman and Ronen (2009) suggest four criteria that SWOT should fulfil: concise, actionable, significant and authentic.

In this study, a SWOT-analysis will be used for sorting and analyzing empirical data.

This will allow early identification of areas of interest in the innovation work of the company, leading to strategic development.

(36)

4.3 Empirical Classification Framework

The creativity canvas and the SWOT-analysis have in this thesis been combined into an empirical classification framework. The framework will be used for classification and sorting of empirical data, building the foundation of the results and the further analysis of the results. This framework allows strategic conclusions to be drawn from the identification of areas of interest, resulting in suggestions for the case company regarding their innovation work. The empirical classification framework can be seen in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: The Empirical Classification Framework based on the Creativity Canvas and SWOT analysis

Strength Weakness Opportunities Threats Key Partners

Key Activities Key Resources Value Proposition Relationships Channels

Customer Segment Cost Structure Revenue

In Appendix B, the filled version of the empirical classification framework is presented.

The empirical findings considered most relevant for the strategic conclusions have been added and can be reviewed.

(37)

Chapter 5 Methodology

In the methodology chapter, the research design and research process will be explained, followed by how the data collection process was conducted and how the gathered empirical data were analyzed together with the literature. Afterwards, a discussion regarding research quality and ethics regarding potential risks.

5.1 Research Design

The research was designed to fulfill the purpose of the study to investigate factors that are important to consider when implementing an idea management system for fostering innovation. The task was to map out the current innovation culture at the case company and identify challenges and opportunities to improve the innovation work and also connect the findings to the latest research and best practices. The automotive industry stands before a shift, and that has created a desire to develop their innovation processes further and collect ideas from internal and external parties in a systematic and digital approach.

The study is explanatory, and the result was expected to partly be built on theory and literature that could complement the observations. Voss et al. (2002) and Yin (1994) argue that for this type of study, an in-depth case study is suitable. The thesis will contribute with suggestions on improvements and explain relationships within the company and predict a possible outcome for the innovation strategy; which, according to Wacker (1998) is called theory-based research. According to Voss et al. (2002), a case study is a good alternative when conducting theory-based research. The drawback of a

(38)

CHAPTER 5. METHODOLOGY

single case study is the limit on the generalizability of research (Voss et al., 2002). This was therefore considered when concluding the case of this study.

Innovation is a topic that often is prioritized in many organizations, and resources are put into research and internal pilot projects. A decision was made to focus on a single case study to see the complexity of innovation and do an extensive empirical study with employees at the case company. Therefore, a qualitative study was chosen to collect relevant and trustworthy data for the research. The combination of a deductive and inductive approach in data collection and research design results in an abductive approach (Håkansson, 2013). The research in this study was conducted with an abductive approach, which is considered beneficial by both Blomkvist and Hallin (2015) and Saunders et al. (2009).

5.2 Research Process

The study was shaped from a non-linear process, where the research structure was shaped gradually by prototyping. The research process consisted of five main stages. An overview of the research process can be found in Figure 5.1. In the first stage, the research topic was selected through a discussion with the case company, and a research question was decided. In the second stage, an extensive literature review was conducted to obtain a greater understanding of innovation research and digital solutions available for working in a global environment. This resulted in three themes, process, culture and system.

Simultaneously theoretical frameworks that could be used for the analysis were explored.

Two frameworks were combined into a conceptual framework. In the third stage, the case was investigated with the collection of empirical findings. This was done through a semi-structured interview process together with observations and internal documents.

The observations and internal documents were used for orientating purposes within the case company and the subject. The research question and scope of the thesis were iterated several times during this period to adapt to the findings and literature. This is a combination of a convergent and divergent process (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015).

In the fourth stage, the findings were classified and analyzed in the created empirical classification framework, which can be found in Section 4.3, to identify key findings. From the empirical study, the same three main themes were identified as in the literature review.

These themes were used to discuss the key findings together with previous literature, in order to answer the research question and for drawing conclusions.

(39)

Figure 5.1: Overview of the research process

5.3 Data Collection

The data used was collected from both primary and secondary sources. In order to increase the validity of the findings, multiple sources and triangulation can be used (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015; Saunders et al., 2009; Yin, 1994). The report is built on multiple sources and a triangulation was done with the literature review, semi-structured interviews and observations.

5.3.1 Secondary Sources

The secondary sources were mainly collected from peer-reviewed articles and were critically reviewed. Critically reviewing the literature is an essential part of a literature review (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015). The literature review was used to generate knowledge to the research area, and not to answer the research question, as suggested by Yin (1994).

The literature should have contributed with statements from current research, relevant concepts and potential limitations (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015). The literature allowed an understanding of the empirical study and was used to support or oppose the empirical

(40)

findings. From the secondary sources, research regarding the subjects of innovation management process, culture, and system was obtained.

5.3.2 Primary Sources

The primary sources collected for this thesis consisted of 17 semi-structured interviews.

Semi-structured interviews allowed specific questions to be asked, while still leaving room for further dialogue and additional questions (Rowley, 2012). This was considered the most suitable for this research. The full interview process can be found in Appendix A.

All the interviews were recorded, transcribed into a collected document and coded. The characteristic of the interviewees at the case company was that they possessed experienced knowledge in the automotive industry. The external interviewees were characterized by the expert knowledge in innovation research, processes and digitalization. A full list of the interviewees can be found in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1: Specifications of interviews Respondent Interview

Date

Interview Length

Industry Context

Role

A1 2020-02-19 40 min Head Office Innovation Manager

A2 2020-02-19 1h 20 min External Company Innovation Manager A3 2020-03-03 35 min Head Office Digitalization Manager

A4 2020-03-03 40 min Head Office Manager

A8 2020-03-10 50 min Markets Manager

A9 2020-03-13 25 min Markets Senior Manager

A14 2020-03-27 30 min Head Office Senior Manager

A16 2020-04-01 65 min KTH Researcher

(41)

The interviewees from the case company were chosen with guidance from the case company supervisor. The reason for this was the supervisor knowledge of the company and the subject. The supervisor was therefore considered a reliable source for guidance.

Interviews at the case company were conducted with people from the head office and the markets. Ten of the interviews was from the context of the head office, respectively, five of the markets. This led to an imbalance in the industry context perspective, which might have affected the findings. One of the reasons for this imbalance was the difficulty of scheduling interviews when operating in different time zones. The reason for separating the interviewees into the context of head office and markets was that interesting similarities and differences were noticed during the interview phase. This resulted in a decision to separate these in the findings in order to conduct a comparison.

Interviewees A2 and A16 were chosen due to their knowledge within the subject of idea management. These two interviews were used in an orientating manner to explore and gain more in-depth knowledge within the subject. Hence, these two interviews were not included in the empirical classification framework and the findings.

Observations were made at the case company, in order to achieve a greater understanding of the research setting. Observations and internal documents were used to obtain information regarding internal processes and structure. Due to confidentiality reasons, these are not shared in this study. This affected the replicability of the study, further discussed in Section 5.5.1.

5.4 Data Analysis

The empirical data was collected, transcribed and coded with the code words found in Table 5.2. The codewords were based on the nine parts of the creativity canvas, and three additional code words identified from the literature. These three code words later became the main themes as a result of the analysis in order to highlight their importance. The coding process followed the framework by Creswell (2009), where interviews were transcribed into raw data, prepared for analysis, and then coded into the decided themes.

Regular discussions were held, to receive a comprehensive overview of the material, where key aspects of the material were put into the Empirical Classification Framework for further discussions. Since interesting differences between the head office and markets were noticed in the interview phase, the interviews were separated and put into two

(42)

Table 5.2: Codewords used for the coding of the interviews

Key Partners Key Activities Key Resources Value Proposition

Relationships Channels Customer

Segments

Cost Structure

Revenues Process Culture System

different Empirical Classification Frameworks to facilitate the process of identifying further similarities and differences. Further explanations of the framework are found in Section 4.3. From the literature and the Empirical Classification Framework, three themes were identified: process, culture, and system. The findings were then processed through these three themes, making it possible to identify synergies or discord between previous research and the empirical study. The identified themes were then used as a basis for the discussion. An overview of the data analysis process is presented in Figure 5.2.

Figure 5.2: Overview of the data analysis process

5.5 Research Quality

The research was done with a qualitative approach, according to Blomkvist and Hallin (2015) allows for a freer interpretation of the data compared to a quantitative approach with conclusions based on experiments and statistical data. The validity, reliability and generalizability need to be evaluated to ensure high-qualitative research.

(43)

5.5.1 Validity

The validity of the research entails that the right thing is studied (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015). Multiple sources of primary and secondary data were used throughout the report to ensure a high level of validity in this report. From the primary data, 17 interviews were held to see internal trends and ideas as well as observations to understand the complexity of the case. Secondary data included critically reviewed research. To ensure validity, external reviewers that provide impartial and objective feedback can be used (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015; Eisenhardt, 1989; Yin, 1994). In this study, regular peer- review sessions were held where external parties went through and critically reviewed the data used in the report, which increased the validity. A risk with the external reviewers was that their structure of reviewing was not disclosed. Hence, there was no transparency in the reviewing process.

5.5.2 Reliability

The reliability of the research entails that the research is done in the right way (Blomkvist

& Hallin, 2015). It also reflects to what extent the study could be repeated and reach the same result, the replicability (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015; Voss et al., 2002). For reliable research, the methods used for data gathering and analysis needs to be transparent (Blomkvist & Hallin, 2015; Saunders et al., 2009; Yin, 1994). The transparency in this study was ensured by using a clear structure for the documentation collected and used. High reliability also ensured validity since, according to Blomkvist and Hallin (2015), validity requires reliability. To ensure the reliability, the authors found and critically reviewed multiple sources to support the different statements. However, since the study was made with a qualitative approach, it opens up for individual interpretations, resulting in a variety of additional conclusions that could be drawn.

For replicability, the literature review should be possible to replicate; however, due to the semi-structured format of the interviews, it is most likely that similar interviews would generate in slightly different answers. Observations of internal documents were not shared due to confidentiality, resulting in less replicability being achieved. All the interviews were conducted with both authors present, and a thorough interview process was set up to avoid misinterpretations and to enable objectiveness. However, a risk remained of misinterpretations of both questions and the answers received. Another risk was interviewees holding back information during interviews due to fear of revealing confidential information.

Implementation of an Idea Management System in a Global Organization: A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

Implementation of an Idea

Management System in a Global Organization

A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

ANTONIA DÅDERMAN MALIN ÅSELIUS

Implementation of an Idea

Management System in a Global Organization

A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

MALIN ÅSELIUS

ANTONIA DÅDERMAN

Implementation of an Idea Management System in a Global Organization

A Case Study in the Automotive Industry

by

Antonia Dåderman Malin Åselius

Implementering av ett idéhanteringssystem i en global organisation

En fallstudie inom transportindustrin

av

Antonia Dåderman Malin Åselius

Contents

List of Figures

List of Tables

Acronyms

Acknowledgements

Chapter 1 Introduction

1.1 Background

1.2 Problem Background

1.3 Purpose

1.4 Research Question

1.5 Delimitations

1.6 Disposition

Chapter 2

Idea Management Process and Culture

2.1 Structural Innovation and Recombining Knowledge

2.1.1 Knowledge Networks

2.2 Idea Management

2.2.1 Searching for Ideas in Global Organizations

2.2.2 Idea Selection

2.3 Organizational Ambidexterity

2.3.1 Ambidextrous Leadership

2.3.2 Enhancing Organizational Ambidexterity

2.4 Culture for Innovation

Chapter 3

Idea Management System

3.1 Using an Idea Management System

3.2 Ideal Requirements

3.2.1 Measurement of Success

3.2.2 Design Choices

3.3 Advantages and Disadvantages

Chapter 4

Theoretical Frameworks

4.1 The Creativity Canvas

4.2 SWOT-Analysis

4.3 Empirical Classification Framework

Chapter 5

Methodology

5.1 Research Design

5.2 Research Process

5.3 Data Collection

5.3.1 Secondary Sources

5.3.2 Primary Sources

5.4 Data Analysis

5.5 Research Quality

5.5.1 Validity

5.5.2 Reliability