The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Resource allocation strategy for innovation portfolio management
Abstract
Our study demonstrates empirically that the choice of resource allocation strategy affects innovation performance. Allocating resources to a broader range of innovation projects increases new product sales, an effect that appears to outweigh that of resource intensity. In addition, we find that the performance benefit of breadth is higher for firms that allocate resources selectively at later stages of the innovation process. This breadth‐selectiveness effect is greatest for firms intending to create relatively more novel products, departing further from their knowledge base. Based on these results, we theorize that breadth increases performance because it spreads firms' bets on unproven innovative endeavors. Limiting resource commitments by selecting out deteriorating projects prevents an escalation in the costs of breadth. This advantage increases with the uncertainty implicit in greater innovative intent. The paper thus contributes to theory of how resource allocation strategies influence performance outcomes of innovation project portfolios . Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003) · Journal of Applied Psychology · doi:10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879 · Cited by 82,194
Laursen, K., & Salter, A. (2006) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.507 · Cited by 6,324
Product development: Past research, present findings and future directions
Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258850 · Cited by 3,777
Innovation objectives, knowledge sources, and the benefits of breadth
Leiponen, A., & Helfat, C. E. (2010) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.807 · Cited by 1,341
An Introduction to Sample Selection Bias in Sociological Data
Berk, R. A. (1983) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095230 · Cited by 1,213
Incentives and Problem Uncertainty in Innovation Contests: An Empirical Analysis
Boudreau, K. J., Lacetera, N., & Lakhani, K. R. (2011) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.1110.1322 · Cited by 830
Optimal structure, market dynamism, and the strategy of simple rules
Davis, J. P., Eisenhardt, K. M., & Bingham, C. B. (2009) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2189/asqu.2009.54.3.413 · Cited by 804
Cited by
Oslo Manual 2018: Guidelines for Collecting, Reporting and Using Data on Innovation, 4th Edition
OECD, & Eurostat (2018) · The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities · doi:10.1787/9789264304604-en · Cited by 1,307
Reymen, I. M. M. J., Andries, P., Berends, H., Mauer, R., Stephan, U., & van Burg, E. (2015) · Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal · doi:10.1002/sej.1201 · Cited by 419
Ban Targeted Advertising? An Empirical Investigation of the Consequences for App Development
Kircher, T., & Foerderer, J. (2024) · Management Science · doi:10.1287/mnsc.2023.4726 · Cited by 36
Metadata
- Authors
- Klingebiel, R., & Rammer, C.
- Venue
- Strategic Management Journal
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2013-05-22
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 246-268
- ISSN
- 0143-2095 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-0266
- OpenAlex
- W1524826946
- Cited by
- 384
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 48.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Resource allocation strategy for innovation portfolio management. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/smj.2107
- The paper
- Klingebiel, R., & Rammer, C. (2014). Resource allocation strategy for innovation portfolio management. Strategic Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.2107
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.