Team recommendation in open innovation networks

ABSTRACT

Open Innovation has become an important new paradigm for incorporating external knowledge and sources in the innovation process of organizations. Besides other discussed arguments the resulting large size of innovator networks suggests that algorithmic approaches for team recommendation may be needed in that scenario. The current work identifies the related difficulties and thoroughly investigates aspects entities for the problem of team recommendation. Based on that, we develop a meta model which allows to instantiate and integrate most of the vast number of the existing socio-/psychological models on optimal team composition. This meta model is necessary for operationalizing our intended team recommendation approach.

REFERENCES

• 1: T. Carte, L. Chidambaram, M. Garfield, L. Hicks, and C. Cole. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, volume 4154, chapter Group Creativity and Collaborative Technologies: Understanding the Role of Visual Anonymity, pages 12--21. Springer, September 2006.
• 2: S.-J. Chen and L. Lin. Modeling team member characteristics for the formation of a multifunctional team in concurrent engineering. Engineering Management, IEEE Transactions on, 51(2):111--124, May 2004.
• 3: H. W. Chesbrough, W. Vanhaverbeke, and J. West. Open innovation: researching a new paradigm. Oxford University Press, illustrated, reprint edition, 2006.
• 4: S. Colucci, T. D. Noia, E. D. Sciascio, F. M. Donini, G. Piscitelli, and S. Coppi. Knowledge based approach to semantic composition of teams in an organization. In SAC -05: Proceedings of the 2005 ACM symposium on Applied computing, pages 1314--1319, New York, NY, USA, 2005. ACM.
• 5: C. K. De Dreu and L. R. Weingart. Task versus relationship conflict, team performance, and team member satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal of applied psychology, 88(4):741--749, 2003.
• 6: J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery, and R. R. Nelson. The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press, illustrated, reprint edition, 2006.
• 7: F. Forster and M. Brocco. Knowledge-Based Intelligent Information and Engineering Systems, volume 5178 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, chapter Understanding Creativity-Technique Based Problem Solving Processes, pages 806--813. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008.
• 8: M. Granovetter. The Strength of Weak Ties. The American Journal of Sociology, 78(6):1360--1380, 1973.
• 9: R. J. Hackman. Handbook of organizational bevahiour, chapter The design of work teams. NJ: Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1987.
• 10: H. Hall and D. Graham. Creation and recreation: motivating collaboration to generate knowledge capital in online communities. International Journal of Information Management, 24(3):235--246, June 2004.
• 11: D. Harhoff, J. Henkel, and E. von Hippel. Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations. Research Policy, 32(10):1753--1769, Dezember 2003.
• 12: D. A. Harrison and K. J. Klein. What's the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. The Academy of Management Review, 32(4):1199--1228, 2007.
• 13: S. Hurley. Application of team-based 360° feedback systems. Team Performance Management, 4(5):202--210, 1998.
• 14: S. S. Kahai and R. B. Cooper. The effect of computer-mediated communication on agreement and acceptance. Journal of Management Information Systems, 16(1):165--188, 1999.
• 15: S. W. Kozlowski and D. R. Ilgen. Enhancing the effectiveness of work groups and teams. Psychologial Science in the Public Interest, 7:77--124, 2006.
• 16: D. Krackhardt. The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. In N. Nohria and R. Eccles, editors, Networks and Organizations: Structure, Form,and Action, pages 216--239. Harvard Business School Press, Boston, MA, 1992.
• 17: D. Lyman and K. Richter. Qfd and personality type: the key to team energy and effectiveness. Industrial Engineering, 27(2):57--61, February 1995.
• 18: L. H. Pelled. Demographic diversity, conflict and work group outcomes: An intervening process theory. Organization Science, 7:615--631, 1996.
• 19: G. Rigopoulos, N. Karadimas, and A. Orsonni. Modeling group decision-making for collaborative teams in enterprises. pages 738--743, May 2008.
• 20: S. Rodan and C. Galunic. More than network structure: how knowledge heterogeneity influences managerial performance and innovativeness. Strategic Management Journal, 25(6):541--562, April 2004.
• 21: I. D. Steiner. Group Process and Productivity. Social psychology. Academic Press, New York, NY, 1972.
• 22: S. G. Straus and J. E. McGrath. Does the medium matter? the interaction of task type and technology on group performance and member reactions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 79(1):87--97, February 1994.
• 23: J. K. Trower and K. K. Moore. A study of the impact of individual goals and team composition variables on team performance. In SIGCPR '96: Proceedings of the 1996 ACM SIGCPR/SIGMIS conference on Computer personnel research, pages 206--213, New York, NY, USA, 1996. ACM.
• 24: K. B. White. An investigation of task team structure and its impact on productivity. In AFIPS '84: Proceedings of the July 9--12, 1984, national computer conference and exposition, pages 497--503, New York, NY, USA, 1984. ACM.

INDEX TERMS

Primary Classification:
  J. Computer Applications
  J.4 SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
      Subjects: Sociology

Additional Classification:
  H. Information Systems
  H.1 MODELS AND PRINCIPLES

  J. Computer Applications
  J.4 SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
      Subjects: Psychology

General Terms:
Design, Human Factors, Management

Keywords:
meta model, team composition, team recommendation