Second, certain middle managers within the innovating firms were greater champions than others, and in particular, the involvement of those in "boundary spanning" functions (i.e. marketing, sales, purchasing, and R&D) was highest overall. Ideas arose most often from interactions with customers, suppliers, and technologies, and we found championing highest where such exposure was most likely. Not only was innovative capability in the firm related to middle management championing and facilitating, then, but these behaviors were concentrated in certain positions. In other words, boundary-spanning middle managers appeared to use strategically important knowledge in ways that fostered the development of core capabilities.

These results supported our argument that middle management was important to strategy and showed that some middle management positions were more important than others. To establish a link to core capability, we needed to determine whether such behavior actually led to improved economic performance. We did not expect a simple linear relationship, however. In fact, this appeared to be a case where “more is not always better.”