This study sheds light on the relationships between digital transformation, business model, and process efficiency capabilities, and new product development (NPD) performance by employing a sequential explanatory approach, combining quantitative and qualitative research methodologies, utilizing structural equation modeling based on 430 questionnaire respondents, and a multiple case study design using four cases. The derived framework highlights that digital transformation does not directly lead to NPD performance but that organizations use idiosyncratic higher order (e.g., business model and process efficiency) capabilities that mediate this relationship to strategically cope with change. When assessing, reconfiguring, and integrating, organizations tap into internal and external value, individual, technological, and organizational (VITO) dimensions to transform operational capabilities and resources. Thus, higher order capabilities enable organizations to leverage firm-external opportunities to adjust intrafirm operational capabilities, resources, and competencies, emphasizing a complex hierarchical and contextual interplay. The contributions of the study are twofold: 1) we provide statistical evidence that the business model and process efficiency capabilities are coping mechanisms to master digital transformation and 2) the successful orchestration of VITO dimensions is essential for assessing, reconfiguring, and integrating resources, competencies, and operational capabilities to derive NPD performance.

This study explores the concept of massive and rapid business scaling (MRBS) in the context of digital start-ups by identifying 20 factors clustered into seven core drivers. Through inductive qualitative research, the study builds on 53 semi-structured interviews with founders, executives, and advisors, leading to the development of a framework that uncovers seven core drivers of MRBS contributing to the scaling process. These core drivers are as follows: 1) scanning the environment and recognizing opportunities, 2) iteratively adjusting the business model with an asset-light structure, 3) achieving operational excellence through digitization, 4) building an efficient and entrepreneurial workforce combined with leadership and vision, 5) leveraging internal resources to strengthen positioning and expand the market, 6) attracting capital to facilitate growth realization, and 7) cultivating organizational agility and a transformation culture. While core drivers one to five imply a processual nature, the sixth and seventh core drivers serve as a foundation for MRBS. Moreover, this study outlines several areas of tension within the process of MRBS. Therefore, the study provides valuable insights for scholars and practitioners.

Discussion in the scholarly literature about partnerships between entrepreneurs and universities for the creation of technological spinouts, and for helping universities to extract more value from their technology-related intellectual property (IP), is lively. However, the literature exhibits a gap in understanding how business schools may participate in the process of technology commercialization by facilitating the creation of intellectual property rights. In this conceptual paper, we seek to fill this gap in three ways. First, we offer some novel conceptual insights by studying the partnership between technical universities and entrepreneurs using a multi-level approach, incorporating a phenomenological research method, through the lenses of several established theoretical perspectives from the domains of economics, social science, and management: the division of labor, motivation, the nature of the firm, organization, and IP. Second, we develop a working hypothesis focused on learning reinforcement through multiple organizational levels that predicts how business schools may play a prominent role in technology commercialization, together with the theoretical conditions under which they may do so. Third, we offer an IP management model under which business schools, as such, may create and appropriate financial value by generating innovation-related IP that may be transferred to enterprises. Our research reveals a misalignment between promising approaches to university-based technological innovation suggested by normative theory and typical approaches associated with extant practice; and it also highlights a strategic issue, which is that the performance of most universities in the domain of technology transfer is disappointing. We suggest a way to address this misalignment, and this strategic issue, which is through the establishment of what we label as "Technology Innovation Laboratories" in business schools-analogous to technical laboratories usually associated with technical universities-that could generate various types of product- or service-related IP. This type of intellectual property-typically different from invention IP, and which we label here as "business IP"-could be exchanged for equity in spinouts or royalties from licensing, similar to the manner in which the invention IP of technical universities is usually commercialized.

Research in artificial intelligence and business model innovation is flourishing. Nevertheless, the current discussion lacks an overarching understanding of, and thus has not sufficiently addressed, the interface between artificial intelligence-enabled business model innovation and the critical role of top management. Although a paradigm shift affecting top management is already occurring, extant management literature is limited, especially in terms of primary research. Accordingly, this study explores how top management can encourage and facilitate artificial intelligence-enabled business model innovation. We utilized an inductive approach and conducted semistructured interviews with 47 practitioners to develop a grounded theory. The developed framework consists of five top management competencies and eight top management roles. Overall, our study contributes to research in business model innovation theory, revealing that top management requires a specific skill set to carry out their roles and fulfill expectations.

Since its inception over two decades ago, the theory of disruptive innovation has sparked heated discussions. Especially because of the increasing importance of societal influences and novel forms of competition and technology, questions about its theoretical value and practical relevance remain. Researchers have focused on firm-internal factors of disruptive innovations to resolve discussions about the validity of the theory. However, the literature lacks an integrated understanding of contextual factors, such as demand, market structure, culture, and regulation, that influence disruptive innovation because of its dispersed, fragmented character across disciplines. Our study addresses this fragmentation and lack of integrated understanding by systematically reviewing 62 articles. The study makes three main contributions. First, we integrate and synthesize the literature on contextual factors of disruptive innovations. Second, we derive a three-phase framework of contextual factors: (1) disruptive susceptibility, (2) emergence and diffusion, and (3) endgame and outcome. Third, we contribute to resolving discussions about the theory's core elements and its predictive value by showing how, depending on the societal, cultural, or market context, the implications of the theory can change. Overall, this article shows how disruptive innovation can start, and be started, by social change. We conclude by suggesting areas for future research.

Venture capital (VC) often involves complex equity contracts with so-called preferential rights affecting the allocation of exit proceeds among different share classes and investors. We structure exit-relevant preferential rights in a two-dimensional framework and develop a contingent claims model that allows for ex-ante valuation of separate shareholdings. The model generates insights on the valuation effects of varying setups in VC financing and indicates considerable mispricing potential of VC investments when applying commonly used heuristics such as the most recent funding round. Applying the model to a sample of ventures indicated an average ’overvaluation’ on a per-share basis of 26.7%, with common stocks and early-stage investments being the most affected. In addition, our analysis provides different implications regarding the effects of preferential right structuring for early and late stage investors.

Building on semi-structured interviews and publicly available documents in the realm of accounting, auditing and capital market regulation in Romania, this paper reviews and reflects on the prerequisites for, and conditions affecting the development of a financial reporting enforcement system (FRES) of Western origin in an emerging economy. It does so by examining institutional factors within and across the key components of the Romanian FRES, namely the engagement of the preparers and auditors of corporate financial reports and their interactions with public oversight bodies. The creation and functioning of the Romanian FRES are driven by the dynamics between Western and local pushes and pulls. Western actors offered support, especially in terms of technical assistance and educational programs, but the Romanian government delayed the implementation of local support mechanisms, such that practices and mindsets did not change initially. Although practices and institutions have evolved since the country joined the European Union in 2007, the pursuit of a functional Western-based FRES remains an on-going process that is highly dependent on both the continuous external provision of adequate resources and the enrolment of national actors in the deployment of these resources.

Previous research reported conflicting results on the effectiveness of economic incentives versus green appeals for promoting pro-environmental behavior and neglected the possibility of combining both as well as country differences. Through online experiments in Germany, the USA and China, we tested a monetary reward for recycling that is only redeemable for eco-friendly products – a “green reward” – in comparison to a standard reward (redeemable for any product) and a green appeal (highlighting environmental impact). In China, green rewards significantly increased recycling intentions via introjected motivation. In the USA, rewards improved intentions mainly via extrinsic motivation. In Germany, green appeals appeared to be the best strategy. Extrinsic rewards are expected to reduce perceived autonomy support, but only did so in the USA. Differences between countries are identified with regard to “crowding-out” of internalized motivation. It appears that under some conditions an environmental purpose can neutralize negative effects of extrinsic incentives.

This special issue publishes contributions from the operations research (OR) community in the following areas and at the intersections of those areas, namely manufacturing and supply chain digitalization, resilience, and sustainability. The application areas of OR and analytics to digital, resilient, and sustainable manufacturing systems may contain descriptive and diagnostic analyses, predictive simulation and prescriptive optimization, real time control, and adaptive learning. Examples of OR and analytics applications include logistics and supply chain control with real-time data, inventory control and management using sensing data, dynamic resource allocation in Industry 4.0 customized assembly systems, improving forecasting models using big data, machine learning techniques for process control, network visibility and risk control, optimizing systems based on predictive information (e.g., predictive maintenance), combining optimization and machine learning algorithms, and supply chain risk analytics.

Over the last four decades, the field of negotiation has become a fully recognized academic discipline around the world and negotiation courses and competitions have become increasingly popular. Although it is believed that negotiators may be trained and that negotiation is a skill that can be taught and evaluated, the question of how to assess negotiation performance systematically and comprehensively remains largely unanswered. This article proposes a negotiation competency model for evaluating negotiation performance. The model includes a set of selected negotiation competencies together with proficiency levels and their behavioral indicators. Our goal is to help scholars design more effective negotiation courses and fairer negotiation competitions, improve negotiation pedagogy, and train negotiators who are well prepared to handle conflicts in our increasingly complex society.