Search results

The purpose of this paper is to examine the individual and joint effects of the two design dimensions, form design and functional design, and moderating role of product innovativeness and technological sophistication in consumer’s evaluation of new products. Employing theoretical underpinnings from categorization theory, this paper investigates two major research questions. First, what type of form is more advantageous for a radically new product or an incrementally new product? Second, is there an individual difference in consumer evaluations to innovative products with various form designs?

One pre-test and three between-subject experiments were performed. In Experiments 1 and 2, a two-way between-group ANOVA analysis was performed to examine the effect of form and the degree of technological innovation on attitude toward the product using different product categories (car and camera). In Experiment 3, a three-way between-group ANOVA analysis was performed to explore the impact of form, the degree of technological innovation and consumer technological sophistication on attitude toward the product.

The results from the three experiments conducted demonstrate that, first, whereas the form design for incremental innovations must be closer to the incumbent products for favorable evaluations, less typical form is evaluated as good as a more typical form for radical innovations. Second, form design of an innovative product matters more to the technologically more sophisticated consumers (experts).

This paper extends the previous design literature and fills the gap of under-researched area by demonstrating that individual difference, technological sophistication, moderates the design effect on consumer evaluation of innovation; providing boundary condition of when the atypical form is not penalized in spite of consumer’s perceived learning cost; examining how the form and function interplay in “high-status product”; and demonstrating how to strengthen the reliability and validity by replicating the study. Managerially, this paper demonstrates that innovating firms can influence the perceived value of new products using form and functionality, and marketing managers who launch really new products have strategic freedom of choosing own product design.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an empirical analysis of whether differing forms of innovation act as complements or substitutes in Irish firms’ production functions.

The approach adopted by this paper is empirical in nature. Data are obtained for approximately 582 firms from the Irish Community Innovation Survey 2004‐2006. In total, four forms of innovation activity are identified: new to firm product, new to market product, process and organisational innovation. Formal tests for complementarity and substitutability are applied to these types of innovation to assess whether they have a complementary effect on firms’ turnover.

The results suggest that there is a substantial degree of complementarity among different forms of innovation. Out of six possible innovation combinations, three are complementary while none exhibits signs of substitutability.

From a business perspective, the importance of organisational change to facilitate technological innovation is highlighted, while from a policy perspective the importance of the incentivisation of organisation and process innovation is also highlighted.

To date, most research has focused on the impact of various forms of innovation, in isolation, on firms’ productivity. They do not consider whether these forms of innovation may in fact be linked, and that by implementing two or more innovations simultaneously, the combined benefits may be greater than the sum of the parts.

The purpose of this paper is to better understand complementarities-in-performance of three forms of innovations: product innovation, process innovation and organizational innovation. Additionally, complementarities-in-use for product innovation are examined, considering an additional condition: manufacturing flexibility.

Using data from 223 unlisted Portuguese industrial firms, and a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis, different combinations of different forms of innovations were examined to identify complementarities-in-performance and complementarities-in-use.

Through the configurational analysis, a path to achieve high performance was uncovered, which includes the presence of both product and organizational innovations. The study also reveals that the joint absence of two conditions (from the three that were considered in the analysis) can lead to low performance. This result indicates that the relationships among the antecedent conditions are non-linear. The configurational analysis also shows that the combination of manufacturing flexibility with either process innovation or organizational innovation can lead to high product innovation. This result confirms that manufacturing flexibility is an important condition for product innovation.

The empirical evidence reported in this paper may be influenced by the definitions that were considered. Further conceptual and empirical research is encouraged to corroborate (or refute) or consolidate the findings presented herein. Moreover, although the obtained results present a high empirical coverage, other antecedent conditions beyond the scope of this study can also play an important role; for instance, marketing could influence innovation performance. Furthermore, radical innovation was not distinguished from incremental innovation when analyzing firm performance.

This study provides some clues for policy makers who aim to enhance firm performance through innovation. Managers should focus on both organizational and technological innovations, in particular product innovation, to improve firm performance. Moreover, they should be aware of the complementarities-in-use for product innovation. Considering the importance of developing product innovation to enhance performance, firms should promote high levels of product innovation. To achieve this outcome, manufacturing flexibility should be present.

Focusing on a very complex and still under-researched topic, this study contributes to the complementarities literature in several ways. This study employs a configurational approach to better understand complementarities and to integrate technological and organizational innovations. By taking this approach, this study acknowledges the existence of non-linearity and identifies not only the strategies to achieve high performance, but also the configurations that lead to low performance.

Radical innovation is still a debated concept in the field of innovation management. Very often, firms cannot pursue radical innovation due to the lack of access to markets, right expertise and financial resources. This issue is even more relevant nowadays, as companies have started to open their innovation activity to external partners. Despite the surging interest in the topic of radical innovation in a context of open innovation, scholars have shown how it can be difficult for companies to achieve the desired outcomes because of a failure to implement the right organizational forms of collaboration with external partners. The paper examines how companies implement successful open innovation cases that lead to successful radical innovations through dedicated organizational forms of collaboration.

The present article leverages three qualitative cases of open innovation projects where SAES group (or the “Company”), an Italian technology-based company, has exploited open innovation through dedicated organizational forms of collaboration to pursue radical innovation.

The findings show how the analyzed cases have required the Company to implement three different forms of collaborations: (1) equity alliance, (2) acquisition and (3) joint venture to pursue radical innovation. In addition, the results give some suggestions about the decision-making processes of the Company and show how a set of both rational and soft factors, such as technical, cultural, geographical, dimensional and human, have to be considered in implementing open innovation for radical innovation.

The results of this study reinforce and enrich existing research on the factors that decision-makers can evaluate for deciding which open innovation modes are the most suitable for leading to successful radical innovations.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how consumers’ willingness to buy is influenced by two essential design elements: form and functional design. Form design refers to appearance and can be categorized as typical or non-typical. Function design relates to product features and can be the basis of whether a new product is perceived as a radically new product (RNP) vs an incrementally new product (INP). An interaction between form (typical vs non-typical) and function (RNP vs INP) was hypothesized and examined based on consumers’ knowledge of a product category and level of technological innovativeness.

Two between subject experiments were conducted in which two factors were manipulated (2×2 ANOVA): the degree of technological innovation (RNP vs INP) and form (more typical vs less typical).

Findings reveal that form design has a minimal impact on consumers’ evaluations of INPs, but less typical form design is preferred over typical form design for RNPs. Moreover, form design matters more to consumers who are technologically more innovative (vs less innovative) and more knowledgeable (vs less knowledgeable).

The managerial implications are multiple. Depending on the degree of the technological innovation, new design form can be strategically aligned to the function of a new product to increase perceived value – an effect observed among South Korean consumers that we anticipate will extend upon other cultures high in uncertainty avoidance.

This research will shed some light on an area of marketing that has been previously under-researched: form-based design in global innovation diffusion focusing on Asian countries and provide a more systematic approach to the empirical studies of form design issues in global marketing. This research extends the current design and innovation literature by examining the two dimensional types of design (visceral form and functionality) and potential moderators: degree of product innovation (RNP vs INP), consumer innovativeness, and consumer knowledge.

Managerial decision making regarding using organizational forms methodology to develop technological innovations in the context of technological strategy has not been the subject of a prolific number of studies; nevertheless, it has proven to be an important matter. This is particularly notable in the Iberoamerican context, where a theoretical framework has not been developed yet. It is within such a context that this empirical research intends to determine the organizational forms used by companies of the machine‐tool sector of the Basque Country in their implementation of processes of technological innovation. This research is supported by the theoretical framework provided by transaction cost economics, evolutionary economics, and competitive strategy theories. It also uses the contrasting approach as a starting point for proposing some extensive ideas on this issue.

This study analyses the link between product/service innovation, partnerships and Managerial Control System (MCS). Particularly, it aims to analyse empirically the role of MCS in supporting the innovation partnership successful functioning and management.

The sample of this study consists of 106 Italian manufacturing firms belonging to the sectors of the Italian economy with the largest number of registered patents according to the European trend chart on innovation.

The results show that MCS may play a key role in reducing risks and lowering the likelihood of failure of innovation partnerships. Particularly, the authors found a positive correlation between the use of informal control mechanisms and a partnership’s successful performance. Moreover, among informal control, the findings show that trust is the only true informal mechanism that can guarantee a successful collaboration. The results of this study may offer relevant implications for practitioners. With regard to the control of the partnership’s activities, the initiatives and creativity of those who are actively involved in the innovation process should not be inhibited; therefore, stifling them with strict rules and procedures would be ineffective but if a firm is not willing to give up formal control mechanisms altogether because it does not believe that a trust-based coordination is sufficiently reassuring, it should opt for “weak”, albeit formal, control mechanisms based on a shared production and management of plans and reports, thus ensuring a perfect information symmetry among different partners.

Notwithstanding the different opportunities provided by partnerships and strategic alliances to support there is a growing body of evidence of a high failure rate in such organisational forms. One of the causes cited in the literature is the high level of risk associated with alliances as compared to internal development of innovation. The risks mainly arise from the difficulties to obtain cooperation with partners that might have different objectives, and from the potential opportunistic behaviour of some of the partners. This is particularly true in innovation networks where the uncertainty of producing an interesting result is very high and the investments that the partners make are considerable. In this context, MCS could play a relevant role in reducing the risks and decreasing the likelihood of failure.

As they account for the largest share of employment and value added, services do not (or cannot) lie outside a Schumpeterian view of innovation phenomena. Of the various attempts at shedding more light on the mechanisms of innovation in service industries and firms, we consider the “reverse product cycle” to warrant special attention because of its highly thought‐provoking nature and its theoretical ambition. This article has two objectives: first, to present this interesting and still neglected theoretical study, and second, to evaluate on a theoretical and empirical level the extent to which Barras’ model meets the objective of a “theory of innovation in services”.

This study examines the effects of incremental and radical creativity on both product and process innovation by considering the moderating roles of knowledge sharing in intensity and quality.

Primary research is conducted over 250 employees from service and manufacturing firms operating in Pakistan. Principal component analyses are conducted for the data reduction process, and multiple regression analyses are performed to test the research hypotheses.

Knowledge sharing intensity and the quality of knowledge sharing moderate the effects of radical creativity on product and process innovation that predicts firm performance. Besides, the research presents the differences in the impacts of incremental and radical creativity with the moderations of organisational knowledge on product and process innovations between the service and manufacturing firms and implications for practitioners and researchers.

This work represents a sample from manufacturing and service firms operating in Pakistan. Still, caution is the generalising specific results to other organisations in either service or manufacturing domains or manufacturing.

While boosting creativity in organisations, knowledge sharing practices differ for sector domains. For service firms, knowledge intensity is essential, while knowledge quality is meaningful for manufacturing firms.

This study contributes to the literature at the crossroads of organisational creativity and innovation twofold; the first is to investigate the combined effects of incremental and radical creativity on product and process innovation separately. The second is to examine the moderator roles of knowledge sharing practices of knowledge quality and intensity while predicting product and process innovation with incremental and radical creativity.