Search

Research Summary: This article examines a firm's investment in the general skills of contract workers in flexible work arrangements. It theorizes that this investment may prolong a productive firm‐worker collaboration even when workers' mobility barriers are low. It also proposes that achieving such benefits requires that the firm frames the relational benefits of the investments both to managers and workers. Such a "relational framing" mitigates worker concerns about subsequent productivity demands and manager concerns about worker mobility. Experimental and non‐experimental studies conducted in a multinational cosmetics direct sales company support the theory. Investments in the general skills of workers—even those in flexible work arrangements—can benefit both firms and workers by deepening the firm‐worker relationship while increasing value creation. Managerial Summary: Should companies train workers in general skills if the workers can easily leave and transfer productivity gains to competing firms? A common answer to this question is "no," especially when targeting workers hired under flexible arrangements, such as gig workers and direct sales representatives. This article offers a different perspective. It predicts that these investments signal a company's commitment to nurture workers' development. In turn, workers reciprocate by prolonging a more productive collaboration. Training thus benefits workers and companies. Using relational terms to frame training programs enables the promotion by managers of training opportunities, and uptake by workers. This framing overcomes managerial concerns about worker exit and worker concerns about subsequent productivity demands. Studies conducted in a multinational cosmetics direct sales company support these arguments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conduct a theory-guided review of the literatures on public–private partnerships and grand challenges (GCs). We adopt an organization design approach to review and identify constructs in public–private collaborations (PPCs) that address societal challenges. Our review identifies the complexities of organizing to tackle GCs, highlights the plurality of organizational forms in PPCs, and explores organizational design considerations in these partnerships. Given the elevated role of private actors in these collaborations, our review provides a new understanding of how they can shape a private-public interface that is robust to the scale and scope of global problems. This leads to a rich research agenda on when, why, and how public and private collaborations matter, and their implications for addressing societal challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open innovation includes external knowledge sources and paths to market as complements to internal innovation processes. Open innovation has to date been driven largely by business objectives, but the imperative of social challenges has turned attention to the broader set of goals to which open innovation is relevant. This introduction discusses how open innovation can be deployed to address societal challenges—as well as the trade-offs and tensions that arise as a result. Against this background we introduce the articles published in this Special Section, which were originally presented at the sixth Annual World Open Innovation Conference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose is a concept often used in managerial communities to signal and define a firm's benevolent and pluralistic approach to its stakeholders beyond its focus on shareholders. While some evidence has linked purpose to positive organizational outcomes such as growth, employee satisfaction, innovation, and superior stock market performance, the definition and application of purpose in management research has been varied and frequently ambiguous. We review literature streams that invoke purpose in the for-profit firm and propose a unifying definition. Next, we develop a framework to study purpose that decouples its framing and formalization within firms from its realization, thus helping to avoid conflation of the presence of purpose with positive organizational outcomes. The framework also highlights internal and external drivers that shape the framing of purpose as well as the influence of the institutional context on its adoption and effectiveness. Finally, we provide a rich agenda for future research on purpose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]