Abstract: We argue that the operational definition proposed by Ramsey et al. does not represent a significant improvement for students of innovation, because it is so restrictive that it might actually prevent the testing of hypotheses on the relationships between innovation, ecology, evolution, culture, and intelligence. To avoid tautological thinking, we need to use an operational definition that is taxonomically unbiased and neutral with respect to the hypotheses to be tested.

Abstract: By the age of 5.5 years, all of the young chimpanzees of Gombe National Park have acquired a skill known as 'termite fishing'. Termite fishing involves inserting a flexible tool made from vegetation into a termite mound and extracting the termites that attack and cling to the tool. Although tool use is a well-known phenomenon in chimpanzees, little is known about how such skills develop in the wild. Prior studies have found adult sex differences in frequency, duration and efficiency of tool-using tasks, with females scoring higher on all measures. To investigate whether these sex differences occurred in youngsters, I performed a 4-year longitudinal field study during which I observed and videotaped young chimpanzees' development of the termite-fishing behaviour. Critical elements of the skill included identifying a hole, making a tool, inserting a tool into a hole and extracting termites. These elements appeared in the same order during the development of all subjects, but females typically peaked at least a year earlier than males in their performance of the skills that precede termite fishing. In addition, young females successfully termite-fished an average of 27 months earlier than young males and were more proficient at the skill after acquisition had occurred. Furthermore, the techniques of female offspring closely resembled those of their mothers whereas the techniques of male offspring did not, suggesting that the process by which termite fishing is learned differs for male and female chimpanzees.

Abstract: Group living offers well-known benefits to animals, such as better predator avoidance and increased foraging success. An important additional, but so far neglected, advantage is that groups may cope more effectively with unfamiliar situations through faster innovations of new solutions by some group members. We tested this hypothesis experimentally by presenting a new foraging task of opening a familiar feeder in an unfamiliar way to house sparrows in small and large groups (2 versus 6 birds). Group size had strong effects on problem solving: sparrows performed 4 times more and 11 times faster openings in large than in small groups, and all members of large groups profited by getting food sooner (7 times on average). Independently from group size, urban groups were more successful than rural groups. The disproportionately higher success in large groups was not a mere consequence of higher number of attempts, but was also related to a higher effectiveness of problem solving (3 times higher proportion of successful birds). The analyses of the birds' behavior suggest that the latter was not explained by either reduced investment in antipredator vigilance or reduced neophobia in large groups. Instead, larger groups may contain more diverse individuals with different skills and experiences, which may increase the chance of solving the task by some group members. Increased success in problem solving may promote group living in animals and may help them to adapt quickly to new situations in rapidly-changing environments.

Abstract: The work of innovation management involves cross-functional coordination among specialists and managers with different work orientations, time horizons, professional backgrounds, and values (Ford and Randolph, 1992). While strong connections across functions are critical for new product development success (Green et al., 2000), some managers may be more adept at fostering effective cross-functional relationships than others. In this article, the authors empirically examine the factors that distinguish reputationally effective innovation workers from their less effective peers. Drawing on the work of Tsui (1984, 1994), reputational effectiveness is defined as the degree to which a manager has been responsive to the needs and expectations of constituents. This research examines the relational skills and interaction patterns of more (versus less) reputationally effective managers. A large business unit of a Fortune 500 telecommunications firm provided the context for our study. Using a two-phase approach, the authors first captured the social network patterns of 268 managers from marketing, research and development (R&D), manufacturing, and other business functions that were involved in the new product development process. In addition, the reputational effectiveness of each person who was identified as a member of the network was measured. In the second phase, the authors examined the relational competencies (e.g., role-taking ability, interpersonal control, openness) of the managers who participated in Phase I of the research. As predicted, the results indicate that role-taking ability is related positively to a manager's reputational effectiveness. No support, however, was found for the relationship between interpersonal control and reputational effectiveness. Interestingly, the authors found evidence of an inverse relationship between openness and effectiveness. By sharing too much information?or alternatively information that does not relate to the task at hand?the reputational effectiveness of a manager is damaged. Importantly, the results reveal that the social network characteristics of a reputationally effective manager differ from those of less effective managers. Closeness centrality, a measure of the degree of access one has to other organizational members, was associated strongly with reputational effectiveness. The results demonstrate that managers who are successful in working across functions appreciate the cognitive and emotional perspectives of diverse constituents and develop relationship ties that provide them with ready access to others across the organization.

Abstract: The social brain hypothesis was proposed as an explanation for the fact that primates have unusually large brains for body size compared to all other vertebrates: Primates evolved large brains to manage their unusually complex social systems. Although this proposal has been generalized to all vertebrate taxa as an explanation for brain evolution, recent analyses suggest that the social brain hypothesis takes a very different form in other mammals and birds than it does in anthropoid primates. In primates, there is a quantitative relationship between brain size and social group size (group size is a monotonic function of brain size), presumably because the cognitive demands of sociality place a constraint on the number of individuals that can be maintained in a coherent group. In other mammals and birds, the relationship is a qualitative one: Large brains are associated with categorical differences in mating system, with species that have pairbonded mating systems having the largest brains. It seems that anthropoid primates may have generalized the bonding processes that characterize monogamous pairbonds to other non-reproductive relationships (?friendships?), thereby giving rise to the quantitative relationship between group size and brain size that we find in this taxon. This raises issues about why bonded relationships are cognitively so demanding (and, indeed, raises questions about what a bonded relationship actually is), and when and why primates undertook this change in social style.