Narrow Results

Involving customers in the development of new products and services helps firms understand customer needs, increasing the likelihood of meeting those needs and expectations. Although a large body of literature addresses the implications of customer involvement for project performance, the results of previous research are somewhat inconsistent. This paper explores this issue by examining the differing impact of customer involvement on the development of new products and new services. We propose that the role of customer involvement differs for these two types of innovations, with involvement in the early stages more important for products and involvement in the launch stage more important for services. Our results, based on a comprehensive dataset on customer involvement in innovation, are consistent with such a pattern, suggesting that more attention should be paid to the conditional benefits of customer involvement in different types of solution development.

This paper adopts a cross-country, multisector approach to investigate the intra- and inter-industry effects of foreign direct investment (FDI) on the productivity of 15 emerging market economies in 2000 and 2008. Our main finding is that intra-industry FDI has a large positive effect on total and “exported” labor productivity. The effects of FDI on total factor productivity are much more elusive, both in statistical and economic terms. This result suggests that foreign firms raise the performance of their host economies through a direct compositional effect. Foreign firms tend to be larger and more input intensive and have greater access to foreign markets than domestic firms. Their greater prevalence mechanically increases average labor productivity and export performance.

This paper revisits the Kuznets postulate that structural transformation will be associated with increasing inequality using comparable time series data for 32 developing and recently developed economies for the post-1950 period. We find that structural transformation in the majority of our economies has resulted in the movement of workers from agriculture to services, and not to manufacturing. Economies show different paths of structural transformation that cut across geographical regions, being either structurally underdeveloped, structurally developing, or structurally developed. We see clear differences in the structural transformation–inequality relationship depending on the stage of structural transformation that a particular economy is in, as well as across regions. We do not see a Kuznets-type relationship between manufacturing employment share and inequality when we take into account the different paths of industrialization that economies in our dataset have followed. On the other hand, inequality unambiguously increases with structural transformation if the movement of workers from agriculture is to services.