<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/css/rss/rss-expand.xml" type="text/xsl" media="screen"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://hbswk.hbs.edu" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
<title>HBS Working Knowledge</title>
<description>Harvard Business School Working Knowledge offers business practitioners a
first look at cutting-edge research and thinking from more than 200 HBS
faculty.</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/</link>


<itunes:subtitle>For Business Leaders</itunes:subtitle>
<itunes:author>Harvard Business School</itunes:author>
<itunes:summary>HBS Working Knowledge is a forum for innovation in business practice, offering readers a first look at cutting-edge thinking and the opportunity to both influence and use these concepts before they enter mainstream management practice.</itunes:summary>
<itunes:owner>
    <itunes:name>HBS Working Knowledge</itunes:name>
    <itunes:email>hbswk@hbs.edu</itunes:email>
</itunes:owner>
<itunes:image href="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/podcastart.jpg" />
<itunes:category text="Business"></itunes:category>
<atom:link href="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[First Look: Feb. 9]]></title>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6362.html</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 10:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6362.html</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Ready to do business in a developing economy? Don't just focus on its market size or growth potential. It's better to first scope out opportunities to build or improve efficient business operations such as credit-card systems, intellectual-property adjudication, and data research firms, according to <em>Winning in Emerging Markets: A Road Map for Strategy and Execution</em>, a new guide set for release this spring from Harvard Business Press. </p>

<p>Identifying and filling such "institutional voids" is key to long-term success, write the authors, HBS professors Tarun Khanna and Krishna G. Palepu, who are experts on strategy and governance in emerging markets worldwide. Khanna is faculty chair for HBS activities in India and the author of <em>Billions of Entrepreneurs: How China and India are Reshaping Their Futures and Yours</em> (2008). Palepu is the School's senior associate dean for International Development.</p>

<p>Focusing on opportunities in the U.S. education sector, Senior Lecturer Stacey M. Childress highlights exciting innovations over the past decade in <em>Transforming Public Education: Cases in Education Entrepreneurship</em>. This just-released book uses 18 case studies to explore trends in education entrepreneurship, along the way explaining how to assess possibilities and constraints, evaluate impact, and recognize the challenges ahead.</p>
<p>&mdash; Martha Lagace</p>
<h3>Working Papers</h3>
<h4>The Architecture of Complex Systems: Do Core-Periphery Structures Dominate?</h4>
 <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Alan MacCormack, Carliss Baldwin, and John Rusnak</td></tr>
  </table>
    <h5>Abstract</h5>
  <p>Any complex technological system can be decomposed into a number of subsystems and associated components, some of which are core to system function while others are only peripheral. The dynamics of how such "core-periphery" structures evolve and become embedded in a firm's innovation routines has been shown to be a major factor in predicting survival, especially in turbulent technology-based industries. To date, however, there has been little empirical evidence on the propensity with which core-periphery structures are observed in practice, the factors that explain differences in the design of such structures, or the manner in which these structures evolve over time. We address this gap by analyzing a large number of systems in the software industry. Our sample includes 1,286 software releases taken from 19 distinct applications. We find that 75%-80% of systems possess a core-periphery structure. However, the number of components in the core varies widely, even for systems that perform the same function. These differences appear to be associated with different models of development&#8212;open, distributed organizations developing systems with smaller cores. We find that core components are often dispersed throughout a system, making their detection and management difficult for a system architect. And we show that systems evolve in different ways&#8212;in some, the core is stable, whereas in others, it grows in proportion to the system, challenging the ability of an architect to understand all possible component interactions. Our findings represent a first step in establishing some stylized facts about the structure of real-world systems.</p>
  <p>Download the paper: <a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-059.pdf">http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-059.pdf</a></p>
 
<h4>Quality Provision, Expected Firm Altruism and Brand Extensions</h4>
 <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Julio J. Rotemberg</td></tr>
  </table>
    <h5>Abstract</h5>
  <p>This paper studies quality choice in a model where consumers expect firms to act altruistically. It is shown that, under plausible assumptions regarding this altruism and the reaction of consumers to firms that demonstrate insufficient altruism, existing firms (or brands) can face a larger demand for new products than new entrants. Moreover, the failure of new products can reduce the demand for a brand's existing products even if the quality of these existing products is well understood by consumers. The model provides an interpretation for the dependence of the success of brand extensions on the "fit" between the original product and the extension. Lastly, the model can explain why a "high-end" firm that is expected to care only for its most quality-sensitive customers can have an advantage in introducing a product relative to a firm that is expected to be more widely altruistic.</p>
  <p>Download the paper from SSRN ($5): <a href="http://papers.nber.org/papers/w15635">http://papers.nber.org/papers/w15635</a></p> 

 <div>
  <h3>Publications</h3>
<h4>Transforming Public Education: Cases in Education Entrepreneurship</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Stacey Childress</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press, 2010</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Based on a popular education entrepreneurship course at Harvard Business School, <em>Transforming Public Education </em>organizes 18 case studies into modules that reflect the predominant opportunities pursued by social entrepreneurs focused on public education in the United States over the last decade. The book offers an overarching framework for creating and evaluating social ventures as well as summaries of the potential for impact and the challenges in a number of opportunity areas.</p>

<p>Purchase the book: <a href="http://www.hepg.org/hep/book/113/TransformingPublicEducation">http://www.hepg.org/hep/book/113/TransformingPublicEducation</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Transforming Public Education: Instructors Guide</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Stacey Childress</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Education Press, 2010</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Companion teaching and module notes for <em>Transforming Public Education: Cases in Education Entrepreneurship</em>.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Winning in Emerging Markets: A Road Map for Strategy and Execution</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Tarun Khanna, Krishna G. Palepu, and Richard Bullock</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Harvard Business Press, forthcoming April</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>The best way to select emerging markets to exploit is to evaluate their size or growth potential, right? Not according to Krishna Palepu and Tarun Khanna. In <em>Winning in Emerging Markets</em>, these leading scholars on the subject present a decidedly different framework for making this crucial choice. The authors argue that the primary exploitable characteristic of emerging markets is the lack of institutions (credit-card systems, intellectual-property adjudication, data research firms) that facilitate efficient business operations. While such "institutional voids" present challenges, they also provide major opportunities for multinationals and local contenders. Palepu and Khanna provide a playbook for assessing emerging markets' potential and for crafting strategies for succeeding in those markets. They explain how to spot institutional voids in developing economies, including in product, labor, and capital markets, as well as social and political systems; identify opportunities to fill those voids, for example, by building or improving market institutions yourself; and exploit those opportunities through a rigorous five-phase process, including studying the market over time and acquiring new capabilities. Packed with vivid examples and practical toolkits, Winning in Emerging Markets is a crucial resource for any company seeking to define and execute business strategy in developing economies.</p>

<p>Pre-purchase the book: <a href="http://hbr.org/product/winning-in-emerging-markets-a-road-map-for-strateg/an/13216-HBK-ENG?N=4294958505%204294934481">http://hbr.org/product/winning-in-emerging-markets-a-road-map-for-strateg/an/13216-HBK-ENG?N=4294958505%204294934481</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>The Architecture of Platforms: A Unified View</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Carliss Y. Baldwin and C. Jason Woodard</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Chap. 2 in <em>Platforms, Markets and Innovation</em>, edited by Annabelle Gawer. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, Mass.: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009, paperback edition</td></tr>
  </table>
<p>An abstract is unavailable at this time.</p>
</div> 

 <div>
  <h4>Opening Platforms: When, How and Why?</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Thomas R. Eisenmann, Geoffrey Parker, and Marshall Van Alstyne</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Chap. 6 in <em>Platforms, Markets and Innovation</em>, edited by Annabelle Gawer. Cheltenham, UK and Northampton, Mass.: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2009, paperback edition</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Platform-mediated networks encompass several distinct types of participants, including end users, complementors, platform providers who facilitate users' access to complements, and sponsors who develop platform technologies. Each of these roles can be opened&#8212;that is, structured to encourage participation&#8212;or closed. This paper reviews factors that motivate decisions to open or close mature platforms. At the platform provider and sponsor levels, these decisions entail 1) interoperating with established rival platforms, 2) licensing additional platform providers, or 3) broadening sponsorship. With respect to end users and complementors, decisions to open or close a mature platform involve 1) backward compatibility with prior platform generations, 2) securing exclusive rights to certain complements, or 3) absorbing complements into the core platform. Over time, forces tend to push both proprietary and shared platforms toward hybrid governance models characterized by centralized control over platform technology (i.e., closed sponsorship) and shared responsibility for serving users (i.e., an open provider role).</p>

<p>Purchase the book: <a href="http://www.e-elgar.co.uk/Bookentry_Main.lasso?id=13257">http://www.e-elgar.co.uk/Bookentry_Main.lasso?id=13257</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Too Many Cooks Spoil the Broth: How High Status Individuals Decrease Group Effectiveness</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Boris Groysberg, Jeffrey T. Polzer, and Hillary Anger Elfenbein</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Organization Science</em> (forthcoming) </td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Can groups become effective simply by assembling high status individual performers? Though an affirmative answer may seem straightforward on the surface, this answer becomes more complicated when group members benefit from collaborating on interdependent tasks. Examining Wall Street sell-side equities research analysts who work in an industry in which individuals strive for status, we find that groups benefited&#8212;up to a point&#8212;from having high status members, controlling for individual performance. With higher proportions of individual stars, however, the marginal benefit decreased before the slope of this curvilinear pattern became negative. This curvilinear pattern was especially strong when stars were concentrated in a small number of sectors, likely reflecting suboptimal integration among analysts with similar areas of expertise. Control variables ensured that these effects were not the spurious result of individual performance, department size or specialization, or firm prestige. We discuss the theoretical implications of these results for the literatures on status and groups, along with practical implications for strategic human resource management.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>The Flattening Firm and Product Market Competition: The Effect of Trade Liberalization on Corporate Hierarchies</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Maria Guadalupe and Julie Wulf</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>American Economic Journals: Applied Economics</em> (forthcoming)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>This paper establishes a causal effect of product market competition on various characteristics of organizational design. Using a unique panel-dataset on firm hierarchies of large U.S. firms (1986-1999) and a quasi-natural experiment (trade liberalization), we find that competition leads firms to flatten their hierarchies: firms reduce the number of positions between the CEO and division managers and increase the number of positions reporting directly to the CEO. The results illustrate how firms redesign their organizational structure through a set of complementary choices in response to changes in their environment. We discuss several possible interpretations of these changes.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Managing Risk in the New World</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Robert S. Kaplan, Anette Mikes, Robert Simons, Peter Tufano, and Michael Hofmann</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Harvard Business Review</em> 84, no. 10 (October 2009): 68-75</td></tr>
  </table>
<p>An abstract is unavailable at this time.</p>

<p>Preview the article: <a href="http://hbr.org/2009/10/managing-risk-in-the-new-world/ar/1">http://hbr.org/2009/10/managing-risk-in-the-new-world/ar/1</a></p>
</div> 

<div>
  <h4>Behavioral Aspects of Price Setting, and Their Policy Implications</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Julio J. Rotemberg</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>In <em>Policymaking Insights from Behavioral Economics</em>. Boston: Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, 2009</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>This paper starts by discussing consumers' cognitive and emotional reaction to posted prices. Cognitively, some consumers do not appear to make effective use of price information to maximize their consumption-based utility. Emotionally, prices can induce regret and anger among consumers. The optimal responses of firm's prices to these reactions can explain why firms charge prices below marginal cost for many goods and why they keep their prices rigid. This explanation of price rigidity has the advantage of being consistent with the observation that the typical size of price increases is nearly invariant to inflation. Lastly, the paper turns to some government policies regarding prices that appear to have some consumer support. It argues that both laws against price gouging and laws regulating the terms of mortgages may have support because consumers recognize that many people do not optimize their consumption effectively and because they are angry at firms that take advantage of this. These attitudes can also explain consumer support for monetary policies that maintain a low level of average inflation.</p>
</div> 

<div>
  <h3>Cases &amp; Course Materials</h3>
<h4>NovoCure Ltd.</h4>
  <p>William A. Sahlman and Sarah Greene Flaherty<br />Harvard Business School Case 810-045</p>
  <p>Venture capitalist William Doyle must raise $35 million for a portfolio company with a promising, novel cancer therapy, just as global capital markets are imploding in the fall of 2008. NovoCure, Ltd., has developed an electrical-field-based therapy, called Tumor Treating fields, for the treatment of cancerous tumors. The therapy has shown significant efficacy with no side effects after five years of testing in human patients. Doyle believes NovoCure has the potential to become an important company with a major new cancer therapy platform but must complete pivotal (Phase III) clinical trials and receive FDA approval. Doyle's venture capital firm, WFD Ventures, has invested $25 million in three rounds to fund pilot clinical trials for glioblastoma and other non-small cell lung cancer, and the first pivotal clinical trial for glioblastoma. Additional financing is needed to proceed with the strategically important second pivotal trial. In the fall of 2008 Doyle was negotiating the final terms of an investment by two prominent hedge funds when the liquidity crisis caused the hedge funds to withdraw from the transaction. Dole must now reevaluate his options for securing the needed financing for this promising young company.</p> 
<p>Purchase this case:<br /><a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/810045-PDF-ENG">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/810045-PDF-ENG</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Zara: Managing Stores for Fast Fashion</h4>
  <p>Zeynep Ton, Elena Corsi, and Vincent Dessain<br />Harvard Business School Case 610-042</p>
  <p>Pablo Isla, the CEO of Zara, wanted to improve operational efficiencies in managing its store network. In particular, he wanted to improve labor productivity at the stores. He considered outsourcing certain store operations to third parties, changing the way store managers were compensated, and creating formal operating procedures for store operations. But he knew he had to be careful. Could an emphasis on improving labor productivity hurt other aspects of store operations?</p> 
<p>Purchase this case:<br /><a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/610042-PDF-ENG">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/610042-PDF-ENG</a></p>
</div>
</div>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[HBS Cases: Looking Behind Google's Stand in China]]></title>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6364.html</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 10:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6364.html</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<div>
<table><tbody><tr><td>Q&amp;A with:</td><td>John A. Quelch</td></tr><tr><td>Published:</td><td>February 8, 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Author:</td><td>Sean Silverthorne</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>
<div>
<div><p>Google, the "do no evil" company, gained entry into the Chinese search engine market last decade by agreeing to ban search results on topics deemed sensitive by the Chinese government. To Google's way of thinking, it could do more good for Internet freedom and the cause of human rights by working inside the country to create value for its Chinese users, employees, and business partners. To critics, Google was selling out its core principles to play in the world's second largest economy.</p>



<p>So it was a shocking turn of events on January 12 when Google announced it would pull up stakes in China unless the country agreed to stop censoring search. The precipitating event: an unsuccessful cyber attack from inside China attempting to burrow into the Gmail accounts of Chinese dissidents. Since the announcement, little has transpired publicly; the two sides are presumably negotiating.</p>
<p>Who are the winners and losers here? Has China been taught a lesson? Has Google been outfoxed? What can other companies learn from this collision of cultures?</p>

<p>Harvard Business School professor John A. Quelch and research associate Katherine E. Jocz have just published a case study, titled <a href="http://hbr.org/product/google-in-china/an/510071-PDF-ENG?Ntt=google+in+china">Google in China</a> (Case 9-510-071), based on public sources, that delves into some of these issues. We talked with Quelch last week.</p>

<p><strong>Sean Silverthorne:</strong> Some see this as a heroic effort by Google to live up to its "do no evil" pillar. But others note the company is turning its back on its Chinese employees, users, partners, and an incredibly large market opportunity that would benefit Google shareholders. What's your view?</p>

<p><strong>John A. Quelch:</strong> Google acted precipitously without giving due consideration to the impact of the announcement on stakeholders, including their Chinese employees, consumers, and business partners.</p> 

<p>Google's justification is that they are putting a stake in the ground on behalf of human rights. If Google is forced out of China, this could become a rallying cry for Internet freedom worldwide, to the benefit of the Google brand. And eventually, the Chinese regime might change to a more democratic form of government, in which case Google's stand might go down in history as one of seminal moments on China's road to democracy.</p>

<p>But this upside for Google is relatively speculative. The immediate downside consequences are more certain. Google has some 700 employees in China, the best of whom are already finding alternative employment. So de facto, Google is going to be a much smaller entity in China. It seems unlikely to me that many talented Chinese will be lining up for jobs at Google in China going forward.</p> 

<p>Google's announcement has also disrupted the plans of a number of important business partners such as Samsung and Motorola, who were all set to launch Android-platform handsets in China. I doubt those partners were notified ahead of time.</p> 

<p><b>Q:</b> OK then, why did Google take this course of action?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> The hacking incident was probably the last straw in a rather long line of issues.</p> 
<p>Sooner or later, Google had to stand up for its principles. They have always been at odds internally as to whether or not being in China, operating a self-censorship approach, is consistent with their "do no evil" philosophy.</p>

<p>Add to this the business fact that only 1 percent of their revenues come from China. There is no reason to suppose that they were going to do any better by being cooperative with the Chinese government.</p> 

<p>Interestingly, a resolution had been reached in the prior week on a separate matter involving the China Written Works Copyright Society, which accused Google of failure to inform or pay authors of books it was digitizing. Google issued an apology. My suspicion is there was thought to be a quid pro quo due from the Chinese that failed to materialize.</p> 

<p><b>Q:</b> One point made by your case, perhaps missed by Google, is that companies doing business abroad must be able to see the world through the eyes of the host government.</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> The Chinese government was taken aback by the Google announcement. True to form, they responded very cautiously initially, while they deliberated what to do. The initial Chinese response came from a mid-level spokesperson at the Foreign Ministry, while the initial response from the United States government came from the secretary of state herself&#8212;and that perhaps elevated the conflict.</p> 



<p>Now the Google issue has become a <em>cause célčbre</em> that encapsulates and exacerbates the already fragile and festering U.S.-China relationship. On the other hand, the concern over human rights in China is a big deal for many in the Western world.</p> 

<p>The Chinese argue that they allow and support free information flow over the Internet with some restrictions. They contend that the United States doesn't feel any discomfort hacking into the Internet traffic of U.S. citizens who are suspected terrorists in the United States. Rightly or wrongly, the Chinese view the political dissidents and Falun Gong activists whom they attempt to track as equivalent.</p> 

<p><b>Q:</b> It was interesting that no other companies backed Google in this dispute. Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer called it "Google's problem."</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> Google's announcement was self-confident and unilateral, but they have the market capitalization to back it up.</p>  
<p>Among multinationals doing business in China, many others have endured cyber attacks on their private networks, although it is unlikely those attacks had the same human rights implications as the attacks on Google.</p>

<p>Multinationals doing business in China have been almost universal in their unwillingness to publicly support Google. Their view is that Google has needlessly upset the apple cart for everybody else. For many of these multinationals, China is or will soon be their second most important market in the world. That is not true of Google.</p>

<p><b>Q:</b> If Google is forced to exit China, will it be a blow financially?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> I don't think so, although they were looking to make progress in China with other lines of business, such as the Android mobile phone platform.</p> 

<p><b>Q:</b> Do you think Google has at least won the PR war here, and raised the flag of human rights in China?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> Not yet. Today Google is still self-censoring content exactly the same way as they were on January the eleventh. So Google has shot itself in the foot without gaining the moral high ground.</p>

<p>How can you impress your customers and supporters around the world through this announcement if you don't actually follow through?</p>
<p><b>Q:</b> Best guess: Will this dispute be resolved, or will Google be forced to keep its word and abandon China? Does China need Google more than Google needs China?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> The Chinese cannot permit Google's public challenge to go unpunished. However, they need not do anything, as the leading employees of Google China are jumping ship to take jobs with Baidu and other competitors. Google will soon be down to a skeleton shift in China and, if they are permitted to stay, they will have a tough time recruiting new employees.</p>

<p><b>Q:</b> Are there lessons here for other multinationals doing business in emerging economies?</p> 

<p><strong>A:</strong> Government relations are critical to business effectiveness in developed as well as in emerging economies. But, in emerging economies, where the public sector and government-controlled enterprises are usually a higher percentage of GDP, managing government relations at the national, provincial, and local levels is even more important.</p> 

<p>You have to know what you are getting into. You have to know whom you are dealing with, what their expectations are, what their rules are. And you either have to operate on a "when in Rome do as the Romans do" policy, or, if you have a clear set of global values that cannot be compromised, you have to decide which countries are off limits.</p> 

<p>The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act helps U.S. multinationals protect their employees from being compromised. But we have no rules of engagement that bear upon the defense of human rights of citizens in host countries in which our multinationals operate. </p>

<p><b>Q:</b> What do you make of China's assertiveness of late, not only in the business sphere but in the political world as well?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> China has become more emboldened and self-confident as a result of its increasing economic significance. China is reluctant to be badgered by Western companies or Western governments into changing its rules and regulations.</p> 

<p>The Chinese do not yet understand international public relations and have perhaps too short-term a view. If they have power and are in the driver's seat today, they act very confident. If, on the other hand, they take a hit or two economically, they become more flexible. There is a very short-term transactional aspect to their diplomacy, which is reflected in their unwillingness to bend on these issues. They certainly are not going to change their ways because of a threat from Google. <img src="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/tack-wk.gif" alt=""/></p>

<div>
<h3>About the author</h3>
<p><b>Sean Silverthorne</b> is Editor-in-Chief of <em>HBS Working Knowledge</em>.</p>

</div>
</div></div>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[What's the Best Way to Make Careful Decisions?]]></title>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6339.html</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 04 Feb 2010 10:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6339.html</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<div>
<table><tbody><tr><td>Published:</td><td>February 4, 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Author:</td><td>Jim Heskett</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>
<div>
<div><p>In his book <em>Blink</em>, <a href="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/4616.html">discussed</a> in this column in February 2005, Malcolm Gladwell advised us to place faith in intuition based on experience in deciding many things quickly. Now Michael Mauboussin, with his book <em>Think Twice</em>, makes the case for a more careful approach, suggesting that we place too much emphasis on intuition and personal experience as opposed to the "wisdom of crowds," mathematical models, and systematically-collected data. He argues that "blink" serves us well in stable environments where feedback from previous decisions is clear and where cause-and-effect relationships can be identified. Unfortunately, in his view these conditions are more and more rare. As he puts it, "intuition is losing relevance in an increasingly complex world &hellip; more is different." You ask, what's new here? Perhaps these sound like "dog bites man" assertions.</p>

<p>I'll risk oversimplifying a complex set of arguments this way: Mauboussin, citing a wide range of examples and research, argues that we use experts (as opposed to diverse "crowds") too frequently, that we too often fail to: identify the nature of the problem, match solution techniques with problems, seek diversity in our feedback, and use technology where possible.</p>

<p>Among other things, he argues, we ignore the subtle and ignored biases that our experiences impose on our independence as decision-makers, we decide too frequently on our emotional reactions to risk (playing the lottery even when we know better, for example), and we succumb to pressures to follow the group. As decision-makers, we are products of our environment to a greater degree than we realize. We take credit for things out of our control while blaming others for failure in similarly uncontrollable circumstances. We hire "stars," only to watch them burn out in a new and different managerial environment.  We look for "best practice" (&agrave; la Jim Collins in <em>Good to Great</em> and others) in highly complex situations where there is little comparability and therefore no best practice, only "it all depends." Worse yet, we are often not conscious of these influences.</p> 

<p>Mauboussin maintains that we too often underestimate the importance of luck in the outcomes of our decisions, employing Nobel Prize-winner Daniel Kahneman's observation that success requires some talent and some luck, while great success requires some talent and a lot of luck. The importance of this observation is that systems that involve significant amounts of luck, such as investing for many people, revert to the mean for the group over time, a fact that can be used to make better decisions without the influences described above. It's why, for example, some successful investors simply choose stocks of the bottom companies in the Dow Jones average in the preceding year in making their investments for the coming year. </p>

<p>Is intuition losing its relevance in an increasingly complex world? Will we need to turn increasingly to such things as quantitative models, "prediction markets" (where people bet on their views), the wisdom of crowds, and even such things as models based on "system dynamics" developed at MIT in the 1960s? And should we rely less on so-called "experts" and "stars"? In short, should we be spending more time examining our true decision-making abilities and the things that influence our results, i.e., more time "thinking twice" than "blinking"? What do you think?</p>

<p><b>To read more:</b></p>

<p>Michael J. Mauboussin, <em>Think Twice:  Harnessing the Power of Counterintuition</em>, (Boston:  HBS Press, 2009)  <img src="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/tack-wk.gif" alt=""/></p>
</div></div>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Accountability and Control as Catalysts for Strategic Exploration and Exploitation: Field Study Results]]></title>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6356.html</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 10:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6356.html</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<div>
<table><tbody><tr><td>Published:</td><td>February 3, 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Paper Released:</td><td>January 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Author:</td><td>Robert L. Simons</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>
<div>
               <div>
                    <div>
                    <h3>Executive Summary:</h3>
                        <p>The need for organizations to both exploit current resources and explore new opportunities is a central and long-standing theme in the literature of organizations. The challenge, of course, is that these two imperatives require very different structures and skills. Exploitation demands a focus on efficiency and effectiveness in executing preset plans and procedures. Exploration requires the ability to step outside these routines by emphasizing experimentation, creativity, and novelty. In this study, HBS professor Robert L. Simons focuses on the relationship between two organization design variables&mdash;span of control and span of accountability. Using data from 102 field studies, he illustrates how these variables can be manipulated by managers to tilt the balance toward either exploration or exploitation in response to different tasks, different organizational contexts, and changing competitive environments. Key concepts include:</p>

                        <ul><li>Managers can <em>fine-tune</em> their organization along the dimensions of exploitation and exploration more easily than we may have suspected. For these situations, accountability and control can be adjusted to create an opening for entrepreneurship.</li>

<li>It is the <em>tension</em> between the resources allocated by organizational architecture and accountability for those resources that provides a powerful catalyst for strategic exploitation and exploration.</li>

<li>Most of the research on exploration and exploitation has focused on design architecture (centralization/decentralization, internal venture groups, alliances) and related organizational coordinating mechanisms. We must remember, however, that these structures are merely tools to affect the behavior of individuals. It is individuals, in the end, who must devote their energy and attention to either exploiting current resources or exploring new opportunities.</li>
</ul>

                    </div>
                </div>
<div>
<h4>Abstract</h4>
<p>This paper reports the collective finding from 102 field studies that look at the relationship between two organization design variables: span of control and span of accountability. Clustering the data yields propositions suggesting that the relationship between these variables may be an important determinant of strategic exploitation and exploration activities.</p>

<p>Data from the field studies suggest that, in accordance with the controllability principle, accountability and control are tightly aligned for exploitation activities. However, this result was found in only a small number of tasks and functions. In the majority of situations, spans of accountability were wider than spans of control. This "Entrepreneurial Gap" is posited to be a result of management's desire for innovation and exploration-and used as a catalyst for changing strategy, creating high levels of customer satisfaction, or motivating people to navigate complex matrix organizations. 
<em>Keywords</em>: Ambidextrous Organization, Strategic Exploration and Exploitation, Entrepreneurial Gap, Accountability, Span of Control.
35 pages.</p>
<div>
<h4>Paper Information</h4>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-051.pdf">Full Working Paper Text</a> <img src="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/ico-pdf.gif" height="16" width="16" alt="" /></li>
<li>Working Paper Publication Date: January 2010</li>
<li>HBS Working Paper Number: 10-051</li>
<li>Faculty Unit:  <a href="http://www.hbs.edu/units/am/">Accounting and Management</a>&nbsp;<img src="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/ico-external.gif" height="11" width="14" alt=""/></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div></div>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[First Look: Feb. 2]]></title>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6343.html</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6343.html</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<p>Is your company rigid or resilient? Breaking down silos is hard to do, but often necessary in the face of unpredictable market conditions. A new book by HBS professor Ranjay Gulati offers up a bevy of role models as well as practical suggestions. </p>

<p>As Gulati writes in <em>Reorganize for Resilience: Putting Customers at the Center of Your Organization</em>, "No firm that I know of has completely attained my definition of truly seamless, but companies such as Jones Lang LaSalle, GE Healthcare, Best Buy, Cisco, and Lafarge (the cement division) are well on their way to a high level of internal seamlessness. And all use the four internal levers of silo busting&mdash;coordination, cooperation, clout, and capabilities&mdash;in concert to drive strong customer centricity and to pull perspective from inside the firm looking out to outside it, looking in."</p>

<p>This week also sees a working paper that studies when and why, in the design of development projects, technical architecture corresponds with or "mirrors" the firm's organizational structure. HBS doctoral candidate Lyra Colfer and professor Carliss Y. Baldwin describe results and present examples from practice in "The Mirroring Hypothesis: Theory, Evidence and Exceptions" [<a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-058.pdf">PDF</a>].</p>
<p>&mdash; Martha Lagace</p>
<h3>Working Papers</h3>
<h4>The Mirroring Hypothesis: Theory, Evidence and Exceptions</h4>
 <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Lyra Colfer and Carliss Y. Baldwin</td></tr>
  </table>
    <h5>Abstract</h5>
  <p>The mirroring hypothesis asserts that the organizational patterns of a development project (e.g., communication links, geographic collocation, team and firm co-membership) will correspond to the technical patterns of dependency in the system under development. Thus the hypothesis predicts that developers with few or no organizational linkages will design independent system components, while developers with rich organizational linkages will co-design highly interdependent system components. (The hypothesis claims a correspondence between organizational structure and technical architecture, but allows causality to flow in either direction.) Scholars in a range of disciplines have argued that mirroring is either a necessary or highly desirable feature in the design of development projects, but empirical research shows that some projects deviate from strict mirroring, seemingly without harmful effects. In this paper, we formally define the mirroring hypothesis, describe its theoretical underpinnings, and systematically review the empirical evidence for and against it. Our review includes 129 studies spanning three levels of organization: within a single firm, across firms, and open community-based development. Across these levels, the hypothesis was supported in 69% of the relevant cases, but not supported in 31%. It was most strongly supported within firms, less strongly across firms, and often violated in community-based development settings. The exceptions in turn were of two types: In four cases, closely collaborating teams within single firms created modular systems comprised of independent components. More surprisingly, in 28 cases, independent and dispersed contributors made highly interdependent contributions to the design of a single technical system (or sub-system). Based on a detailed analysis of the latter 28, we introduce the concept of actionable transparency as a means of achieving coordination without mirroring. Contributors achieve actionable transparency by embedding their design in a centralized system with a shared design language and near-real-time updating, where everyone with an interest in improving the design has the right and the means to act on it. We present examples from practice and then describe the more complex organizational patterns that emerge in lieu of genuine mirroring when actionable transparency allows people to "break the mirror."</p>
  <p>Download the paper: <a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-058.pdf">http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-058.pdf</a></p>
 
<h4>Criminal Recidivism after Prison and Electronic Monitoring</h4>
 <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Rafael Di Tella and Ernesto Schargrodsky<br />NBER Working Paper Series, No. 15602, December 2009 </td></tr>
  </table>
    <h5>Abstract</h5>
  <p>We study the re-arrest rates for two groups: individuals formerly in prison and individuals formerly under electronic monitoring (EM). We find that the recidivism rate of former prisoners is 22% while that for those "treated" with electronic monitoring is 13% (40% lower). We convince ourselves that the estimates are causal using peculiarities of the Argentine setting. For example, we have almost as much information as the judges have when deciding on the allocation of EM&#8212;the program is rationed to only some offenders&#8212;and some institutional features (such as bad prison conditions) convert ideological differences across judges (to which detainees are randomly matched) into very large differences in the allocation of electronic monitoring.</p>
  <p>Download the paper from SSRN ($5): <a href="http://papers.nber.org/papers/w15602">http://papers.nber.org/papers/w15602</a></p> 

<div>
  <h3>Publications</h3>
<h4>Seven Lessons for Leading in Crisis</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Bill George</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Warren Bennis Series. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass, 2009</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p><em>Seven Lessons for Leading in Crisis</em> outlines the seven critical lessons leaders need to learn when facing crises. The book contains numerous examples of successful and failed leaders, with stories to illustrate their experiences and the author's advice to readers who may face similar crises.</p>

<p>Purchase this book: <a href="http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/PressRelease/pressReleaseId-55338.html">http://www.wiley.com/WileyCDA/PressRelease/pressReleaseId-55338.html</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Reorganize for Resilience: Putting Customers at the Center of Your Organization</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Ranjay Gulati</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Harvard Business School Press, forthcoming</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>In an era of raging commoditization and eroding profit margins, survival depends on resilience: staying one step ahead of your customers. Sure, most companies say they're "customer focused," but they don't deliver solutions to customers' thorniest problems. Why? Because they're stymied by the rigid "silos" they're organized around. In <em>Reorganize for Resilience</em>, Ranjay Gulati reveals how resilient companies prosper both in good times and bad, driving growth and increasing profitability by immersing themselves in the lives of their customers. This book shows how resilient organizations cut through internal barriers that impede action, build bridges between warring divisions, and transform former competitors into collaborators. Based on more than a decade of research in a variety of industries, and filled with examples from companies including Cisco Systems, La Farge, Starbucks, Best Buy, and Jones Lang LaSalle, Gulati explores the five levers of resilience: 1) Coordination: connect, eradicate, or restructure silos to enable swift responses. 2) Cooperation: foster a culture that aligns all employees around the shared goals of customer solutions. 3) Clout: redistribute power to "bridge builders" and customer champions. 4) Capability: develop employees' skills at tackling changing customer needs. 5) Connection: blend partners' offerings with yours to provide unique customer solutions.</p>
<p>Purchase this book: <a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/web/product_detail.seam?R=1721-HBK-ENG&amp;conversationId=355532&amp;E=3159">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/web/product_detail.seam?R=1721-HBK-ENG&conversationId=355532&E=3159</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Merchants to Multinationals</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Geoffrey Jones</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>Tokyo: Nihon Keizai Hyoronsha, 2009, Japanese edition</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p><em>Merchants to Multinationals</em> examines the evolution of multinational trading companies from the eighteenth century to the present day. During the Industrial Revolution, British merchants established overseas branches which became major trade intermediaries and subsequently engaged in foreign direct investment. Complex multinational business groups emerged controlling large investments in natural resources, processing, and services in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. </p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Nominal versus Indexed Debt: A Quantitative Horse Race</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Laura Alfaro and Fabio Kanczuk</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Journal of International Money and Finance</em> (forthcoming). (Also Harvard Business School Working Paper No. 05-053 and NBER Working Paper No. 13131.)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>The main arguments in favor of and against nominal and indexed debt are the incentive to default through inflation versus hedging against unforeseen shocks. We model and calibrate these arguments to assess their quantitative importance. We use a dynamic equilibrium model with tax distortion, government outlays uncertainty, and contingent-debt service. Our framework also recognizes that contingent debt can be associated with incentive problems and lack of commitment. Thus, the benefits of unexpected inflation are tempered by higher interest rates. We obtain that costs from inflation more than offset the benefits from reducing tax distortions. We further discuss sustainability of nominal debt in developing (volatile) countries.</p>
</div> 

<div>
  <h4>Performance Measure Aggregation, Career Incentives, and Explicit Incentives</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Romana L. Autrey, Shane S. Dikolli, and D. Paul Newman</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Journal of Management Accounting Research</em> (forthcoming)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>We examine a setting in which managers have differential career concerns and firm performance is publicly observed using disaggregated measures that are incrementally informative but costly to contract upon. In such a setting, when do firms contract on aggregated rather than disaggregated performance measures? We show that at intermediate levels of managerial career concerns contracting on an aggregate measure can be welfare enhancing. In this case, the net cost of both contracting directly on an aggregate measure and exploiting career incentives based on disaggregated measures is smaller than the cost of contracting directly on disaggregate measures. Our findings also imply that detailed performance disclosures will be accompanied by lower incentive weights based on aggregate performance when career incentives mitigate distortions caused by aggregation. Further, if performance measures become noisier due to transient shocks, we find that contractual incentive weights on aggregate performance can be either increasing or decreasing, depending on the magnitude of a manager's career incentives.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Altruistic Utility Functions for Joint Decisions</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>David E. Bell and Ralph L. Keeney</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>In <em>The Mathematics of Preference, Choice and Order</em>, edited by Steven Brams, William V. Gehrlein, and Fred S. Roberts, 27-38. Studies in Choice and Welfare Series. Springer Verlag, 2009 </td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>All of us make decisions that are not entirely self-centered; we voluntarily anticipate what we think to be the preferences of others and incorporate them into our decision making. We do this, not because of legal requirements or social norms, but because we are altruistic; we care intrinsically about the welfare of others. In this paper, we illustrate for these types of decisions how confusion may arise because the distinction between our personal (egotistical) preferences and our altruistic concerns is not carefully distinguished. We first define the distinction between personal and altruistic preferences, and then show how to use both of these kinds of preferences in prescriptive decision making methodologies.</p>

<p>Purchase the book: <a href="http://www.springer.com/economics/economic+theory/book/978-3-540-79127-0">http://www.springer.com/economics/economic+theory/book/978-3-540-79127-0</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Loan Syndication and Credit Cycles</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Victoria Ivashina and David S. Scharfstein</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>American Economic Review</em>, Papers and Proceedings (forthcoming)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Cyclicality in the supply of business credit has been the focus of a considerable amount of research. This cyclicality can stem from shocks to borrowers' collateral, which affect firms' ability to raise capital if agency and information problems are significant (Ben S. Bernanke and Mark Gertler, 1989). Or it can stem from shocks to bank capital, which affects the supply of bank loans if agency and information problems limit the ability of banks to raise additional capital (Bernanke, 1983). In this paper, we examine cyclicality in the supply of credit in the context of modern forms of banking, often referred to as the "originate-to-distribute" model. In particular, we focus on the role of syndicated lending.</p>

<p>Download the paper from SSRN ($5): <a href="http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1538892">http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1538892</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Exploration and Exploitation within and across Organizations</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Dovev Lavie, Michael Tushman, and Uriel Stettner</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>The Academy of Management Annals</em> (in press) </td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Jim March's framework of exploration and exploitation has drawn substantial interest from scholars studying phenomena such as organizational learning, knowledge management, innovation, organizational design, and strategic alliances. This framework has become an essential lens for interpreting various behaviors and outcomes within and across organizations. Despite its straightforwardness, this framework has generated debates concerning the definition of exploration and exploitation and their measurement, antecedents, and consequences. We critically review the growing literature on exploration and exploitation discuss various perspectives, raise conceptual and empirical concerns, underscore challenges for further development of this literature, and provide directions for future research.</p>
</div> 

<div>
  <h4>Quality Management and Job Quality: How the ISO 9001 Standard for Quality Management Systems Affects Employees and Employers</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>David I. Levine and Michael W. Toffel</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Management Science</em> (forthcoming)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Several studies have examined how the ISO 9001 Quality Management System standard predicts changes in organizational outcomes such as profits. This is the first large-scale study to explore how employee outcomes such as employment, earnings, and health and safety change when employers adopt ISO 9001. We analyzed a matched sample of nearly 1,000 companies in California. ISO 9001 adopters subsequently had far lower organizational death rates than a matched control group of non-adopters. Among surviving employers, ISO adopters had higher growth rates for sales, employment, payroll, and average annual earnings. Injury rates declined slightly for ISO 9001 adopters, although total injury costs did not. These results have implications for organizational theory, managers, and public policy.</p>

<p>Download the paper: <a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/09-018.pdf">http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/09-018.pdf</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Endowments, Fiscal Federalism, and the Cost of Capital for States: Evidence from Brazil, 1891-1930</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>André Martínez-Fritscher and Aldo Musacchio</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Financial History Review</em> (forthcoming)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>There is a large amount of literature that aims to explain what determines country risk (defined as the difference between the yield of a sovereign's bonds and the risk-free rate). In this paper, we contribute to the discussion by arguing that an important explanatory factor is the impact that commodities have on the government's capacity to pay. We use a newly created database with state-level fiscal and risk premium data for Brazil states between 1891 and 1930 to show that in Brazilian states that exported commodities that were in high in demand (e.g., rubber and coffee) the state governments ended up having higher tax revenues per capita and, thus, lower cost of capital. We also explain that the variation in revenues per capita was both a product of the variation in natural endowments and a commodity boom that had asymmetric effects among states. These two effects generated variation in revenues per capita at the state level thanks to the extreme form of fiscal decentralization that the Brazilian government adopted in the Constitution of 1891, which gave states the sole right to tax exports. We also use indices of export prices for each state as instruments for revenues per capita. Our instrumental variable estimates confirm our results that states with commodities that had higher price increases had lower risk premia.</p>

<p>Download the paper: <a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-027.pdf">http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-027.pdf</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Elections and Discretionary Accruals: Evidence from 2004</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Karthik Ramanna and Sugata Roychowdhury</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Journal of Accounting Research</em> (forthcoming)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>We examine the accrual choices of outsourcing firms with links to U.S. congressional candidates during the 2004 elections, when corporate outsourcing was a major campaign issue. We find that politically connected firms with more extensive outsourcing activities have more income-decreasing discretionary accruals. Further, relative to adjacent periods, the evidence is concentrated in the two calendar quarters immediately preceding the 2004 election, consistent with heightened incentives for firms to manage earnings during the election season. The incentives can be attributed to donor firms' concerns about the potentially negative consequences of scrutiny over outsourcing for themselves and for their affiliated candidates.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Fair Pricing</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Julio J. Rotemberg</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Journal of the European Economic Association</em> (forthcoming)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>This paper explores the consequences of supposing that consumers see a firm as fair if they cannot reject the hypothesis that the firm is somewhat benevolent towards them. When consumers can reject this hypothesis, some become angry, which is costly to the firm. The desire to appear benevolent can lead firms to adopt third-degree price discrimination based on the income of different consumer classes while foreswearing third-degree price discrimination based on differences in the elasticity of demand. It can also explain why prices seem to be more responsive to changes in factor costs than to changes in demand that have the same effect on marginal cost. Lastly, if consumers experience regret or disappointment when faced by increased prices, the model can explain why prices can be more rigid in response to disasters that increase demand dramatically than they are when there is a less substantial increase in demand.</p>
</div> 
<div>
  <h4>Lone Inventors as Sources of Technological Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality? </h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Jasjit Singh and Lee Fleming</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Management Science</em> 56, no. 1 (2010)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>Are lone inventors more or less likely to invent breakthroughs? Recent research has attempted to resolve this question by considering the variance of creative outcome distributions. It has implicitly assumed a symmetric thickening or thinning of both tails, i.e., that a greater probability of breakthroughs comes at the cost of a greater probability of failures. In contrast, we propose that collaboration can have opposite effects at the two extremes: it reduces the probability of very poor outcomes&#8212;because of more rigorous selection processes&#8212;while simultaneously increasing the probability of extremely successful outcomes&#8212;because of greater recombinant opportunity in creative search. Analysis of over half a million patented inventions supports these arguments: Individuals working alone, especially those without affiliation to organizations, are less likely to achieve breakthroughs and more likely to invent particularly poor outcomes. Quantile regressions demonstrate that the effect is more than an upward mean shift. We find partial mediation of the effect of collaboration on extreme outcomes by the diversity of technical experience of team members and by the size of team members' external collaboration networks. Supporting our meta-argument for the importance of examining each tail of the distribution separately, experience diversity helps trim poor outcomes significantly more than it helps create breakthroughs, relative to the effect of external networks.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Complex Business Models: Managing Strategic Paradoxes Simultaneously</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Authors:</th><td>Complex Business Models: Managing Strategic Paradoxes Simultaneously</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td><em>Long Range Planning</em> (in press)</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>As our world becomes more global, fast paced, and hypercompetitive, competitive advantage may increasingly depend on success in managing paradoxical strategies&#8212;strategies associated with contradictory, yet integrated tensions. We identify several types of the complex business models organizations will need to adopt if they are to host such paradoxical strategies. Managing complex business models effectively depends on leadership that can make dynamic decisions, build commitment to both overarching visions and agenda specific goals, actively learn at multiple levels, and engage conflict. Leaders can engage these functions through team-centric or leader-centric structures.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>On Knowing and Doing: A Perspective on the Synergies between Research and Practice</h4>
  <table>
    <tr><th>Author:</th><td>Michael Tushman</td></tr>
    <tr><th>Publication:</th><td>In <em>Doing Research That Is Useful for Theory and Practice</em>. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, in press</td></tr>
  </table>
  <h5>Abstract</h5>
<p>The current rigor/relevance debate is a central strategic issue for business schools and their faculty. I argue that ongoing relationships with firms, rooted on the joint acknowledgement of the importance of faculty research by firms and respect for practice by faculty, increase the quality and impact of faculty research. With roles and boundaries clear, such ongoing relationships with firms, particularly those rooted in executive education venues, increase the insightfulness of our research questions and the quality of our data. Such relationships also benefit doctoral training. Further, to the extent that these relationships help faculty translate our field's research into practice, we are able to live into our institutions' promise to shape managerial practice. These engaged relationships with firms help faculty and their business schools excel in both rigor as well as relevance. This paper provides a personal example of these synergistic relationships and discusses boundary issues associated with these faculty/firm collaborations. Executive education in general, and custom programs in particular, may be an underleveraged vehicle in reducing the rigor/relevance gap between business schools and the world of practice.</p>
</div>

<div>
  <h3>Cases &amp; Course Materials</h3>
<h4>Akin Ongor's Journey</h4>
  <p>Rosabeth Moss Kanter<br />Harvard Business School Case 306-072</p>
  <p>A retired bank CEO, one of Turkey's most admired leaders, wants to start a leadership institute to develop emerging leaders in the eastern Mediterranean region. Describes his biography and values, the models he established for excellent financial performance and corporate social and environmental responsibility at the bank, and his attempt to partner with an American university to establish the institute. His first approach did not work; what should he do now?</p> 
<p>Purchase this case:<br /><a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/306072-PDF-ENG">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/306072-PDF-ENG</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Communispace</h4>
  <p>Anat Keinan<br />Harvard Business School Case 510-018</p>
  <p>Communispace is the market leader in creating and managing private, brand-focused online communities for major corporate clients. These communities have provided its clients with insights into how consumers view their brands, with quick feedback on potential marketing decisions, and with a sounding board for new product ideas. Now, a potential client has asked Communispace to build and manage an online community for the sole purpose of fostering word-of-mouth for a new brand it was launching. Should Communispace take on this assignment? </p> 
<p>Purchase this case:<br /><a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/510018-PDF-ENG">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/510018-PDF-ENG</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>Hulu: An Evil Plot to Destroy the World?</h4>
  <p>Anita Elberse and Sunil Gupta<br />Harvard Business School Case 510-005</p>
  <p>In July 2009, Jason Kilar, the chief executive officer of Hulu, is debating 
online video aggregator should move away from a purely advertising-supported model, and whether it should participate in an industry-wide initiative to develop and test "authentication" technology that can facilitate a subscription or pay-per-view model. The case traces the early years of Hulu, a joint venture between News Corp. and NBC Universal, that was initially met with strong skepticism but quickly became on the most celebrated and popular online video business. Provides in-depth information on how the company serves content owners, users, and advertisers. Describes the online video space in considerable detail, also covering economic and viewership statistics that enable a rich discussion of viable business models.</p> 
<p>Purchase this case:<br /><a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/510005-PDF-ENG">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/510005-PDF-ENG</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>The Investment Fund for Foundations (TIFF) in 2009</h4>
  <p>Luis M. Viceira and Brendon C. Parry<br />Harvard Business School Case 210-008</p>
  <p>In late June 2009, management at The Investment Fund for Foundations (TIFF) was considering expanding the footprint of the TIFF Diversified Fund (TDF), the first truly comprehensive endowment management vehicle offered under the TIFF banner. The recent large capital losses suffered by most endowments, including those of Harvard and Yale, had motivated some to question the two basic premises of the endowment investment model&#8212;that investors get rewarded for bearing illiquidity, and that a diversified blend of asset classes and strategies provides meaningful protection against capital losses under virtually all market conditions. Despite this questioning, the investment professionals at TIFF were convinced that this model remained viable as a means of generating superior long-term returns, and that TDF was a vehicle that provided TIFF's current and potential clients access to this model. But they were aware that they would need to increase their efforts to educate their clients on the benefits of this comprehensive approach to investing and also reflect on whether to modify the current structure of TDF, particularly regarding its liquidity provisions.</p> 
<p>Purchase this case:<br /><a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/210008-PDF-ENG">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/210008-PDF-ENG</a></p>
</div>

<div>
  <h4>The University of Notre Dame Endowment</h4>
  <p>Andre F. Perold and Paul Buser<br />Harvard Business School Case 210-007</p>
  <p>The Endowment Model of Investing, which was based on creating high risk-adjusted performance through diversification, a long time horizon, top-notch outside managers, and illiquid investments, had served Notre Dame and other large universities well over the past several decades. Scott Malpass, Notre Dame's Chief Investment Officer, was confident that this was a successful way to invest if implemented effectively, but he also saw the top university endowments experience 25% to 35% declines in portfolio value during the second half of 2008 that eviscerated the investment gains from the past several years. Notre Dame had weathered the crisis relatively well, but there were several key questions Malpass had to address. Should Notre Dame continue to make illiquid investments in the context of rising unfunded commitments relative to liquid funds? Was compensation adequate for the illiquidity of these types of investments? In relation to manager selection, how could the Notre Dame investment team continue to find the best managers to create alpha? To what extent would the performance of managers during the crisis be predictive of future performance in other portions of the economic cycle? How would the long-established industry terms of contract between clients and managers change going forward? Was there an opportunity for clients to negotiate better terms? These issues all needed to be addressed in the context of protecting the University's operating budget and supporting the mission of the institution.</p> 
<p>Purchase this case:<br /><a href="http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/210007-PDF-ENG">http://cb.hbsp.harvard.edu/cb/product/210007-PDF-ENG</a></p>
</div>
</div>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[The 'Luxury Prime': How Luxury Changes People]]></title>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6324.html</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6324.html</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<div>
<table><tbody><tr><td>Q&amp;A with:</td><td>Roy Y.J. Chua</td></tr><tr><td>Published:</td><td>February 1, 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Author:</td><td>Sarah Jane Gilbert</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>
<div>
<div><p>Are people who travel in town cars and on corporate jets different&#8212;on a psychological level&#8212;from you and me? Does the availability of luxury goods "prime" individuals to be less concerned about or considerate toward others? The answer from new research seems to be yes.</p>

<p>HBS professor Roy Y.J. Chua and Xi Zou, an assistant professor at London Business School, suggest that luxury goods have an important effect on human behavior that is only now becoming clear&#8212;and that may have implications for addressing the continuation of objectionable choices among, for example, high-flying executives on Wall Street.</p>

<p>According to Chua, their research found that "people who were made to think about luxury prior to a decision-making task have a higher tendency to endorse self-interested decisions that might potentially harm others."  Their findings are detailed in the HBS working paper "The Devil Wears Prada? Effects of Exposure to Luxury Goods on Cognition and Decision Making" [<a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-034.pdf">PDF</a>].</p>

<p>"Will the same business meeting reach different decisions when it is held at a luxury resort as opposed to a modest conference room?" the authors write. "Will CEOs who bequeath themselves expensive office facilities and luxurious corporate jets make different business decisions than those who do not? In this age of Wall Street excesses, these are pertinent questions that could further our understanding of why some [people] continue to place their own interests over others', even in difficult economic times."</p>

<p>Chua, whose research draws on human psychology to better understand important social processes in business organizations, explained more about the findings in an e-mail Q&amp;A.</p>

<p><strong>Sarah Jane Gilbert:</strong> You conducted two experiments to explore a psychological link between the notion of luxury and self-interest. What did you find?</p>

<p><strong>Roy Chua:</strong> In the first experiment, participants were asked to answer a series of business-related decision-making questions that were designed to tap the extent to which people place self-interests (profit maximization for one's firm) above society interests. An example involved asking participants how likely they are to endorse the manufacturing of a new model of car that could bring in enormous profit but could potentially pollute the environment. Before answering these questions, half of the participants were asked to evaluate luxury products, while the other half evaluated cheaper equivalents. We found that people who were made to think about luxury prior to the decision-making task have a higher tendency to endorse self-interested decisions that might potentially harm others.</p> 

<p>These results led us to wonder whether "luxury-primed" individuals are simply self-interested or are indeed more prone to harm others. Thus, we conducted a second experiment that was similar to the first one in that the participants were either primed with luxury or not. The difference is that after the prime, we asked them to do a word recognition exercise. The task was to write down the first word that came to their mind when given a string of scrambled letters. These strings of scrambled letters were each constructed by interleaving a pro-social word with an anti-social word of equal length. Examples of the pro-social words used were nice, giving, and helpful; examples of anti-social words were rude, stingy, and selfish. We found that luxury-primed participants identified significantly fewer pro-social words than non-luxury-primed participants. However, there was no significant difference in the identification of anti-social words.</p> 

<p>This pattern of findings suggests that luxury-primed individuals were <em>not more likely</em> to have anti-social cognition, but were <em>less likely</em> to have pro-social thoughts. In other words, when thinking about luxury, people tend to focus more on themselves and less on others.</p>

<p><b>Q:</b> Did anything in your research surprise you?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> The findings are not so much surprising as illuminating. We expected a relationship between luxury and self-interests. However, self-interested behaviors are often conflated with those that do harm to others (e.g., selling low-quality products that might be harmful to consumers). Our second study to some extent clarifies the psychological dynamics that arise from luxury.</p> 

<p>Luxury does not necessarily induce one to do harm to others, but simply causes one to be less concerned or considerate toward them.</p> 

<p><b>Q:</b> How do your findings help us to understand corporate greed? Do you think there is a different mindset now for companies and executives to change and become more socially and morally responsible?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> In the midst of the current global economic crisis, people are outraged by highly paid executives living in the lap of luxury while continuing to make self-serving decisions and ignoring the plight of others. To date, more than a year since the crisis started, despite much public outrage and threats to more strongly regulate the financial industry, there do not seem to be any substantive changes in their mindset. Bankers are still planning large bonuses for themselves.</p> 

<p>One commonly proffered explanation is that these executives lack a moral compass, leading them to care only about themselves to the extent of hurting others. Our findings offer another perspective&#8212;the fact that these executives are surrounded by luxury did not help their decision-making to be more "other-oriented." Yet their seemingly "immoral" decisions stem not so much from a real desire to hurt others but more from over self-indulgence.</p> 

<p>Perhaps besides limiting the size of bonuses, limiting corporate excesses and luxuries might be a step toward getting executives to behave more responsibly.</p>

<p><b>Q:</b> Since your research is work in progress, do you have plans to expand your study to uncover additional findings? What would you include in future studies?</p>

<p><strong>A:</strong> Yes, this is still very much work in progress. While our findings established the effects of exposure to luxury, we believe more work is required. Future research should tease out the nuances in the psychological effects of "luxury prime" (which we have shown to promote self-interest) and "money prime" (which has been shown to promote self-sufficiency and independence).</p> 

<p>Toward this end, Xi Zou and I have recently completed a new study in which participants tested perfumes as part of an ostensible marketing research project. Participants were divided into two groups: In the first group, participants read about perfumes as luxury products, and in the second group, participants read about perfumes as becoming daily necessities. Both groups tested the same perfumes. We found that luxury-primed participants behaved in a more self-interested manner in that they were less likely to make contributions toward the public good. Priming luxury did not have any effect on self-sufficiency measures, suggesting that priming luxury is different from priming money.</p>

<p>Future research should also examine the mechanisms through which luxury goods activate self-interests. We posit that several potential mechanisms may be involved in the process. Exposure to luxury goods may activate a social norm that it is appropriate to pursue interests beyond a basic comfort level, even at the expense of others. It may be this activated social norm affects people's judgment and decision-making. Alternatively, exposure to luxury may directly increase people's personal desire, causing them to focus on their own benefits such as prioritizing profits over social responsibilities.</p> 

<p>Although these two mechanisms lead to the same observed results, they have distinct social implications. As social scientists, we think it is important to understand the "why" beneath the effects we found, and so we are currently planning more studies. <img src="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/tack-wk.gif" alt=""/></p>

<div>
<h3>About the author</h3>
<p><b>Sarah Jane Gilbert</b> is a product manager for Harvard Business School's Knowledge and Library Services.</p>

</div>
</div></div>
]]></description>
</item>
<item>
<title><![CDATA[Does Product Market Competition Lead Firms To Decentralize?]]></title>
<link>http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6355.html</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 10:00:00 EDT</pubDate>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://hbswk.hbs.edu/rss/6355.html</guid>
<description><![CDATA[<div>
<table><tbody><tr><td>Published:</td><td>January 28, 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Paper Released:</td><td>January 2010</td></tr><tr><td>Authors:</td><td>Nicholas Bloom, Raffaella Sadun, and John Van Reenen</td></tr></tbody></table>
</div>
<div>
               <div>
                    <div>
                    <h3>Executive Summary:</h3>
                        <p>There is a widespread sense that over the last two decades firms have been decentralizing decisions to employees further down the managerial hierarchy. Economists have developed a range of theories to account for delegation, but there is less empirical evidence, especially across countries. This has limited the ability to understand the phenomenon of decentralization. Nicholas Bloom, HBS professor Raffaella Sadun, and John Van Reenen assembled a new data set on about 4,000 firms across 12 countries in Europe, North America, and Asia, and then measured the delegation of authority from central headquarters to local plant managers. Key concepts include:</p>

                        <ul><li>Competition is associated with a greater degree of delegation. </li>

<li>One of the reasons for the move toward decentralization over time in developed countries may be increasing competition, possibly arising from more globalized product markets. </li>

<li>A reason for greater centralization in less developed countries may be lower competitive intensity.</li>
</ul>

                    </div>
                </div>
<div>
<h4>Abstract</h4>
<p>There is a widespread sense that over the last two decades firms have been decentralizing decisions to employees further down the managerial hierarchy. Economists have developed a range of theories to account for delegation, but there is less empirical evidence, especially across countries. This has limited the ability to understand the phenomenon of decentralization. To address the empirical lacuna we have developed a research program to measure the internal organization of firms - including their decentralization decisions - across a large range of industries and countries. In this paper we investigate whether greater product market competition increases decentralization. For example, tougher competition may make local manager's information more valuable, as delays to decisions become more costly. Since globalization and liberalization have increased the competitiveness of product markets, one explanation for the trend towards decentralization could be increased competition. Of course there are a range of other factors that may also be at play, including human capital, information and communication technology, culture and industrial composition. To tackle these issues we collected detailed information on the internal organization of firms across nations. The few datasets that exist are either from a single industry or (at best) across many firms in a single country. We analyze data on almost 4,000 firms across twelve countries in Europe, North America and Asia. We find that competition does indeed seem to foster greater decentralization. 
12 pages.</p>
<div>
<h4>Paper Information</h4>
<ul>
<li><a href="http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/10-052.pdf">Full Working Paper Text</a> <img src="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/ico-pdf.gif" height="16" width="16" alt="" /></li>
<li>Working Paper Publication Date: January 2010</li>
<li>HBS Working Paper Number: 10-052</li>
<li>Faculty Unit:  <a href="http://www.hbs.edu/units/strategy/">Strategy</a>&nbsp;<img src="http://hbswk.hbs.edu/images/site/ico-external.gif" height="11" width="14" alt=""/></li>
</ul>
</div>
</div></div>
]]></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
