Being too good for your own good: A stakeholder perspective on the differential effect of firm‐employee relationships on innovation search

Abstract

Research Summary : A firm's stakeholder orientation toward its employees is argued to be beneficial for firm outcomes. However, this orientation may also have disparate impacts on particular behaviors and outcomes, such as local versus distant search, which impose contradictory firm requirements. We find that while a strong firm–employee relationship leads to increasingly higher levels of local search (exploitation), it also leads to increasingly lower levels of distant search (exploration). In additional supplementary analyses, we find similar disparate effects on the productivity of innovation and its market value, as well as a moderating effect of the firm's relationship with other stakeholders which exacerbates both the positive and negative impacts of firm–employee relationships. We discuss the implications of these findings for both the innovation and the instrumental stakeholder literatures. Managerial Summary : Motivating employees toward generating new ideas and innovations is an important challenge for most firms. Establishing the firm as a trustful and good partner for employees may engender in them the commitment and willingness to invest in such activities. However, questions remain as to how “well” the firm should “treat” its employees, and the potential adverse consequences from over‐investing in such relationships. This paper examines these important practical questions and finds that establishing strong relationships with employees can be simultaneously beneficial and harmful for the firm depending on the type of new ideas it seeks. We find that such strong relationships helps with motivating employees to build on and perfect existing knowledge, but is harmful with respect to bringing in new and unfamiliar knowledge.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 62 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.