@article {1059,
	title = {Editorial: Insights (March 2017)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {03/2017},
	pages = {3-3},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {collaboration, exploitation, exploration, hybrid entrepreneurship, innovation ecosystems, insourcing, organizational ambidexterity, outsourcing, part-time entrepreneurship, R\&D, roles, suppliers},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1059},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1059},
	author = {Chris McPhee}
}
@article {1062,
	title = {A Managerial Decision Tool for R\&D Outsourcing and Partner Selection in High-Technology Industries},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {7},
	year = {2017},
	month = {03/2017},
	pages = {25-32},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Deciding which tasks and projects are best performed in-house and which should be outsourced to external suppliers are, alongside the supplier selection process, among the key challenges for R\&D managers operating in high-technology firms. This study presents a decision tool for evaluating whether to pursue R\&D tasks in-house or to outsource them. The tool also helps R\&D managers to evaluate which of the supplier candidates would be best suited to undertake the task to be outsourced. The tool is based on four views of evaluation that have both managerial and theoretical roots: identity, dependence, efficiency, and competence. The tool has been developed in a qualitative multiple case study based on R\&D supplier relationships and has been empirically tested in an R\&D organization.},
	keywords = {decision tool, outsourcing, partner selection, research and development, supplier involvement},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/1062},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/1062},
	author = {Iivari Kunttu}
}
@article {860,
	title = {Editorial: Cybersecurity (January 2015)},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {01/2015},
	pages = {3-4},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	keywords = {automotive manufacturing, botnet takedowns, botnets, commercialization, critical infrastructure, cyber-attacks, cybersecurity, employee training, gamification, Internet, outsourcing, quantum key distribution},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/860},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/860},
	author = {Chris McPhee and Tony Bailetti}
}
@article {863,
	title = {Securing the Car: How Intrusive Manufacturer-Supplier Approaches Can Reduce Cybersecurity Vulnerabilities},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {5},
	year = {2015},
	month = {01/2015},
	pages = {21-25},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Today{\textquoteright}s vehicles depend on numerous complex software systems, some of which have been developed by suppliers and must be integrated using "glue code" so that they may function together. However, this method of integration often introduces cybersecurity vulnerabilities at the interfaces between electronic systems. In this article we address the {\textquotedblleft}glue code problem{\textquotedblright} by drawing insights from research on supplier-manufacturer outsourcing relationships in the automotive industry. The glue code problem can be framed as a knowledge coordination problem between manufactures and suppliers. Car manufacturers often employ different levels of intrusiveness in the design of car subsystems by their suppliers: the more control over the supplier the manufacturer exerts in the design of the subsystem, the more intrusive the manufacturer is. We argue that high intrusiveness by car manufacturers in defining module interfaces and subcomponents for suppliers would lead to more secure cars. },
	keywords = {automobile manufacturing, car design, control, cybersecurity, glue code, governance, intrusiveness, outsourcing, supplier, supplier-manufacturer relationships, vulnerabilities},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/863},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/863},
	author = {Mohamed Amin and Zaid Tariq}
}
@article {734,
	title = {Using Boundary Management for More Effective Product Development},
	journal = {Technology Innovation Management Review},
	volume = {3},
	year = {2013},
	month = {10/2013},
	pages = {30-35},
	publisher = {Talent First Network},
	address = {Ottawa},
	abstract = {Twenty years ago, most companies developed their own products in a single location and brought them to market themselves. Today, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) are enlisting partners on a global scale as subsystem designers and producers in order to create and deliver new products into the market more rapidly and more frequently. This is especially true for large, complex products from the aerospace, telecommunications, electronics, and software industries. To assure the delivery of information across organizational boundaries, new coordination mechanisms need to be adopted (boundary management). In this article, best practices are described on how OEMs and partners self-organize and use agile, cooperative techniques to maintain daily communication among numerous internal and partner engineers to better coordinate product design and system integration. This article focuses on examples from the aerospace industry; however; these tactics can be applied in any organization to innovate at faster rates, to make delivery times more predictable, and to realize shorter product development timelines.},
	keywords = {boundary management, collaborative product development, outsourcing, partnering, product development, review-approve process},
	issn = {1927-0321},
	doi = {http://doi.org/10.22215/timreview/734},
	url = {http://timreview.ca/article/734},
	author = {John Thomson and Vince Thomson}
}
