Search results

The purpose of this paper is to explain to managers of small and medium enterprises (SMEs) and other professionals why they need to connect innovation and value creation in their decision-making processes when dealing with new or existing products.

Innovation and value creation are interconnected and you cannot have one without the other. However, to appreciate that interconnection, one needs to understand the form that value can take in products, the tangible form and the intangible. This understanding helps explain how culture and esteem affect product value, as well as how innovation happens in the technological field and in the cultural field.

Value and innovation are intrinsically connected and this should not be overlooked in any quest for new solutions. SMEs should pay more attention when developing innovation activities to ensure that they have the most suitable organizational structures and resources.

This paper clearly demonstrates the relationship between innovation and value creation.

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the importance of a strategic approach to collaborative innovation and the use of a value chain research methodology for identifying opportunities for co‐innovation.

Value chain analysis is used to map three flows in the Houston Farms value chain; material flow, information flow and relationships. Having diagnosed the current level of co‐innovation we then identify improvement projects and opportunities for co‐innovation to reduce cost and add value, for the benefit of the value chain as a whole.

The application of the value chain analysis methodology to the Houston Farms value chain revealed the importance of strategy and robust processes in key areas for co‐innovation – R&D and new product development. It also revealed that small businesses can enjoy a degree of success as a result of comparative advantage in certain areas but that sustainable competitive advantage cannot occur by chance – identifying the potential for co‐innovation is an important first step in the right direction.

The value chain innovation roadmap represents a useful framework for exploring the current state and future capability for co‐innovation in a value chain. The value chain analysis methodology is an effective diagnostic tool as it focuses on what happens at the interface between stakeholders and how this relates to what final consumers regard as value adding, rather than traditional financial and functional KPIs which make it difficult to explore the competitiveness of the value chain as a whole.

The explicit and objective measurement of what consumers value is an important addition to the value chain analysis methodology and the co‐innovation roadmap is an original attempt to illustrate the core drivers and capabilities for achieving co‐innovation in a value chain. The insights from the case demonstrate the value of this approach to companies who are open to innovation and recognise the need to focus the use of scarce value‐adding resources on specific value chains and the needs and wants of final consumers therein.

The purpose of this article is to better understand the relevance of value creation in the interconnection amongst entrepreneurship, marketing and innovation by reviewing the literature.

The authors employed a systematic review methodology using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol to analyse the literature in depth. The articles were selected from the Scopus database and dated from 1987 to 2021. An initial total of 1,158 articles was successively narrowed down to a final list of 123 papers matching the selection criteria. Moreover, content analysis on the sample was performed to explore and analyse whether value creation directly or indirectly appears as a goal or antecedent amongst entrepreneurship, marketing and innovation.

The findings suggest that the literature does not clearly define the topic linkage, and with the authors' results, the authors provide a comprehensive mapping of the contributions to a theoretical framework that synthesises knowledge. Moreover, the authors highlight that the interconnection between marketing and entrepreneurship, i.e. entrepreneurial marketing, requires an innovative approach for satisfying customer needs and creating value. Co-occurrence analysis of the keywords also allowed to identify four clusters that were open to new research streams.

Entrepreneurship, marketing and innovation are recognised research topics in the business and management literature. However, prior research has not provided clear and comprehensive evidence about how these three research topics are linked to each other. This work analyses the hidden relationship amongst them.

The aim of this paper is to propose a consistent framework that allows the brand manager to detect innovation/growth opportunities and risks.

The paper is based on an extensive theoretical study of innovation and growth approaches combined with analysis of cases (Dell and Red Bull) and many practical examples. The different approaches are compared at three levels: the customer value, the process and customer segment level. It also uses principles of the logical brand management model, proposed in a JPBM (2004) article as a benchmark.

The paper shows that many frameworks still focus too much on the firm's perspective instead of the customer perspective. An approach is proposed in which growth and innovation starts from the customer value. It allows to detect potential opportunities and risks at a very detailed level.

The growth and innovation model proposed may be used in a business‐ to‐consumer and a business‐ to‐business context (as illustrated with the cases and examples).

Continuous adjustment of the customer value, by manipulating importance and satisfaction rates of different brand drivers leads to a continuous redefinition of contextual segments. In an effort to keep current customer segments and to attract new ones a balance must be sought continuously when adjusting the brand drivers. This kind of audit may also be perceived as a risk management approach for brand managers who want to evaluate innovation and growth options.

This paper “integrates” many innovation and growth approaches into “one” consistent approach.

The aim of this paper is to present a macro view of the evolution of innovation for value creation, from the closed to collaborative, open, and now co‐innovation. It reviews several mega trends that have dramatically changed the dynamic nature of the global market place and also several new forces that have made innovation imperative for organizational value creation.

The paper provides a conceptual overview of co‐innovation through some of its basic elements such as convergence revolution, collaboration, and co‐creation with stakeholders.

Co‐innovation is a new innovation paradigm where new ideas and approaches from various internal and external sources are integrated in a platform to generate new organizational and shared values. The core of co‐innovation includes engagement, co‐creation, and compelling experience for value creation. Thus, the practices of co‐innovative organizations are difficult to imitate by competition.

Innovation is imperative for organizational survival in today's turbulent global market. This conceptual paper presents many real‐world examples of co‐innovative firms' strategies that can provide new insights for follower organizations.

Innovation is a universal strategy for every organization, be it a firm, non‐profit organization, or even a government agency. The new innovation approaches suggested in the paper can contribute to social reforms such as creating shared value for all stakeholders.

This is an original paper that presents a broad‐stroke direction and vision for new organizational strategies for innovation.

Through a juxtaposition of social capital with two other forms of intellectual capital – human capital and organizational capital – the author proposes and tests a framework that sets social capital apart as the main driver of innovations that contribute subsequent technical value to the innovating organization.

This study uses data collected from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for measurement of the key variables. Specifically, the analysis includes all 117 innovations patented under the thermal inkjet printing subclass that were issued in the twenty years following the establishment of that specific subclass in 1980. The author also collected additional data on the individuals and organizations listed on each patent.

The results of the analysis show that all intellectual capital is not the same and that social capital resulting from collaborative relationships among inventors has significantly more positive influence on the retained technical value of an innovation than organizational or human capital.

Rather than tout the primacy of individual intelligence to the generation of valuable innovation, this research suggests that it is preferable to bring together a group of inventors with narrow individual scientific expertise who instead rely on broad collaboration networks as a flexible source of diverse knowledge.

This research addresses an area of innovation research that has not been adequately explored – how do different forms of intellectual capital affect the value the resulting innovation has to the innovating organization?

The purpose of this paper is to offer a fresh framing of innovation, as service innovation/value innovation.

By examining the visions, patterns and outcomes of three different research approaches to understanding innovation – goods-dominant (G-D) logic, the resource-based approach and service-dominant (S-D) logic – the authors strive to outline the contribution of each to the debate on innovation. This investigation involves a comprehensive literature review. Scrutiny of a case company provides a means of identifying and illustrating how these approaches play out in a real business context.

A framework for innovation builds on the comparison of the three research approaches. G-D logic, when analysed in terms of new product development and new service development, positions innovation as an output (a new good or service) of a business's internal processes, with the firm as the main actor. The resource-based approach establishes the drivers of innovation as knowledge, capabilities and relationships, but the firm is still the main innovator. S-D logic addresses “open” innovation processes in which all actors in the network can mobilize and integrate their resources to become value co-innovators.

This study builds on the literature review by offering a more systematic way of dealing with the different research traditions in innovation debate.

This study spurs managers to question the validity of dominant logic and how it affects the decision-making process. The conceptualization of innovation within S-D logic provides new avenues for decision makers and practitioners to tackle topical challenges of global competition.

The value of this paper lies in defending the premise that S-D logic is better suited than the other two research traditions to frame current innovation within the context of global competition because it moves innovation beyond mainstream conceptualization: from “products and services” to “service and value”, from “buyer-seller dyads” to “ecosystem relationships”, and from “closed/linear process” to “open/co-created process”.

Starting from the foundations of value innovation, this paper aims to give an idea of the key drivers and barriers – internal and external to the company – and to provide insight into proven capabilities underscoring the ability to create a flow of new value initiatives. These thoughts are then confronted with the present challenges of Industry 4.0 and the Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT). The confrontation leads to the identification of five capabilities for future-proof value innovation.

Literature review based upon the work of the author with more than two decades of experience within value innovation research is included. The review is supplemented with recent literature and an overview of the challenges of Industry 4.0/IIoT, which leads into a confrontation of the present status of value innovation with future requirements.

Value innovation remains important specifically for established companies facing path-breaking digital disruption of their existing business models provoked by Industry 4.0 and IIoT. Five key capabilities are suggested to rejuvenate value innovation and prepare it for the Industry 4.0 challenge: capabilities for designing, adapting and marketing product service systems; capabilities for blending digital strategy and processes with value offerings; capabilities for designing and mobilizing ecosystems and integrating these into a value-based IIoT platform; capabilities for combining and integrating technological and value innovation approaches; and capabilities for linking value creation to value capturing.

This paper is more of a “viewpoint” than an empirically based paper presenting new research findings. It is based on expert judgment and confrontation with extant literature. The outlook indicating five key capabilities needs further empirical corroboration.

The overview of barriers and the “toolkit” for value innovation (Figure 1) and the five capabilities for future value innovation are expected to be managerially relevant.

The paper highlights the concept of value innovation, as discussed over the past decades, and links it to recent challenges and opportunities imposed by Industry 4.0 and the IIoT. The concept of value or strategic innovation is still valid but needs a re-conceptualization in view of these developments. The paper provides five capabilities business marketers should develop to perform value innovation in an Industry 4.0 environment.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the concept of meaning as a relevant but missing link in understanding the building blocks of service innovation informed by service-dominant (S-D) logic. In exploring the role of meaning in service innovation, especially related to new value propositions, resource integration and new value cocreation, the authors suggest using the conceptualization of meaning within human-centered design, which has an established body of knowledge on addressing how actors engage and interact.

The paper builds an actionable conceptual framework that relates meaning to central tenets of service innovation, such as resource integration, value propositions and cocreation of value. It delineates the central building blocks of service innovation and conceptually integrates them with meaning to explain the underlying mechanisms of service innovation related both to its development and adoption.

The findings highlight how and why meaning precedes value creation and directs resource integration. Indicating that meaning is driven by experience of earlier interactions it delineates its relationships with new value formation and positions resource interpretation as a driver of this process.

This paper extends the understanding of service innovation in relation to S-D logic, with meaning as a conceptual link to aspects of S-D logic that claim a phenomenological nature. Meaning contributes to S-D logic by providing an understanding of how beneficiaries form intentions to engage in value creation and resource integration. Additionally, by integrating service and design research domains, this paper suggests possibilities for multidisciplinary contributions in future research.