According to researchers from Drexel University and Rutgers University as presented in the Journal of Management,in industries that rely heavily on intellectual capital,such as technology,life sciences,or the arts,the loss of talented employees may have an unexpected benefit for the organization.While turnover of star scientists did disrupt innovation related to existing lines of research in the companies,it also increased the rate of innovation in previously unexplored areas.Companies adapt to the loss of talent by exploring products,brands,and methods they may not have otherwise considered.Which of the following statements is not a key takeaway from this research?
A) The loss of talented employees disrupts innovation related to established products.
B) The loss of talented employees allows fresh perspectives and ideas to emerge.
C) Companies adapt to star turnover by innovating in formerly unexplored areas.
D) Employee turnover broadly hurts an organization.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

Employee turnover can both hurt and help an organization. People are central to the processes of identifying, developing, and commercializing innovations effectively. They need broad sets of skills as well as experience, experience working with teams and experience working on successful innovation projects. To capture value from innovation activities, companies must provide strategic decision makers with staff members who make it possible. According to the Drexel-Rutgers research, during the period studied, 90 stars from 32 organizations left to join other biotechnology firms. The effects of turnover were significant and complex. Compared with their peers, companies that lost star scientists saw an average decline of 14 percent in exploitation-related innovation during the next three years. At the same time, however, the departure of a star scientist led to a 22 percent average increase in exploration-related innovation during the next three years. In other words, although the departure of a star scientist was disruptive to existing areas of innovation, companies appeared to adapt by exploring new areas. These effects, moreover, varied from company to company, depending on the characteristics of the star scientist. In general, the more the scientist was involved in patent activity and collaborated with others in the company, the larger the effects of his or her departure on the organization's subsequent levels of innovation.

According to Researchers from Drexel University and Rutgers University as Presented