The Role of Early Adopters in the Diffusion of New Products: Differences between Platform and Nonplatform Innovations

This paper takes a contingency view to investigate how the role of early adopters (EAs) in the diffusion process changes between platform and nonplatform innovations, what launch decisions firms take to leverage the role of EAs, and how these decisions change between platform and nonplatform innovations. Relying on an exploratory multiple case study of eight industrial product innovations launched in Italy in the 2000s, the paper suggests that the EAs of these innovations play two distinct roles in the diffusion process. The first role, called dissemination, sees EAs triggering and bolstering the propagation of information regarding their opinion about the value for money, properties, advantages, and disadvantages of the new product after they have bought and applied it in their operations. The second role, labeled imitation, consists of EAs inadvertently communicating to later buyers the fact that they have bought the new product, which propels imitative behavior and thus subsequent adoption. A key finding of the paper, which supports a contingency view of innovation diffusion, is that the dissemination role played by EAs has an impact on the adoption of platform innovations, whereas the imitation one is the mechanism through which EAs stimulate subsequent adoption in the case of nonplatform new products. Furthermore, the paper's results point to a constructive view of the process of launching an innovation, whereby firms target at launch different segments of EAs, whose identity is shaped depending on the platform versus nonplatform nature of the innovation and thus on the role they are expected to play in the diffusion process. Concerning managerial implications, this study provides a first tentative understanding of the launch decisions that product and marketing managers may use to target the most appropriate segments of EAs, to leverage their roles and ultimately to favor diffusion. As regards platform innovations, targeting decisions should be driven by the goal to improve the chances that EAs will be willing to disseminate their experience and opinion regarding the new product. As regards instead nonplatform innovations, firms should target EAs whose specific characteristics increase the likelihood of an imitative reaction by later buyers that fear to suffer a competitive disadvantage if they do not conform to EAs' behavior.     

Incremental and Radical Innovation in Coopetition—The Role of Absorptive Capacity and Appropriability

This study examines why some firms are better able than others to reap benefits from collaborating with their competitors in innovation. Whereas on the general level, collaborative innovation has been studied widely, and firm‐specific success factors in collaboration between competitors (i.e., coopetition) have not been exhaustively addressed. Earlier literature describes coopetition as a risky but potentially rewarding relationship in which sharing, learning, and protection of knowledge are recognized as the key issues determining the possible benefits and hazards. This study provides evidence of factors related to this, suggesting that the firm's ability to acquire knowledge from external sources (potential absorptive capacity) and to protect its innovations and core knowledge against imitation (appropriability regime) are relevant in increasing the innovation outcomes of collaborating with its competitors. This study also distinguishes between incremental and radical innovations as an outcome of coopetition, and provides differing implications for the two innovation types. The empirical evidence for the study was gathered from a cross‐industry survey conducted on Finnish markets. The data are analyzed with multivariate multiple regression analysis. The results of the analysis suggest that (1) potential absorptive capacity and appropriability regime of the firm both have a positive effect in the pursuit of incremental innovations in coopetition, and (2) in the case of radical innovations, appropriability regime has a positive effect, while the effect of absorptive capacity is not statistically significant. However, the results also indicate that there is a moderating relationship between these variables, in that the potential absorptive capacity is positively associated with creation of radical innovations within high levels of appropriability regime. These results yield important theoretical and managerial implications. As a whole, the results presented in this study provide new evidence on which types of firms can reap success in the challenging task of collaborative innovation with rivals. In the case of incremental innovation, a firm‐level emphasis on knowledge sharing and learning will positively affect the results of coopetition, as will an emphasis on knowledge protection. Thus, when incremental developments are pursued in coopetition, firms should not only seek to exchange knowledge to create value but also remember to secure the firm‐specific core knowledge within the firm's borders to stay competitive. On the other hand, when the firm is pursuing radical innovation with its rivals, the heaviest emphasis should be on protecting its existing core knowledge and also emerging novel innovations and market opportunities. Capabilities in knowledge acquisition are also beneficial in these cases, but the full benefits of knowledge exchange realize only when the firm's knowledge protection mechanisms are sufficiently strong, allowing for safe knowledge exchange between rivals.     

The thin red line between success and failure: Path dependence in the diffusion of innovative production technologies

The wide variation in the success of innovations obscures similarities in the process of firms being influenced by other firms when choosing production technology. We argue that diffusion processes are similar across successful and failed innovations. Production asset innovation success results not only from innovation quality differences—early chance events and subsequent path dependence are also intrinsic to diffusion processes. Thus, diffusion processes do not reliably spread the best innovations, producing competitive advantage for firms with an early lead producing innovations and firms adopting high‐quality innovations. We test these predictions quantitatively by analyzing the diffusion of the DC‐10 and L‐1011 airplanes, and find support for our theory linking the social information provided by firm adoptions to the success of innovative production technologies. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Appropriability and the retrieval of knowledge after spillovers

Research summary: Firms create and capture value through innovation. In technology‐driven firms, there has been an explicit emphasis on appropriability through imitation deterrence and cumulative inventions that build on prior firm innovation. We introduce systematic empirical evidence for a third mechanism of appropriability namely, knowledge retrieval, which is defined as the re‐absorption of previously spilled knowledge. We extend previous studies which consider technological complexity and organizational coupling as predictors of appropriability by examining their impact on knowledge retrieval. We find that technological complexity has a curvilinear relationship with retrieval while organizational coupling has a negative relationship. We discuss the implications of these findings for theories of absorptive capacity, organizational design and appropriability of innovation. Managerial summary: It is a widely held assumption that knowledge should be protected and held tightly within the firm to ensure value creation and value capture. The implicit recognition is that knowledge spillovers, or knowledge leakage, is detrimental to performance. By examining the patterns of citations among patents of 142 semiconductor firms, we study how organizational structure and technological complexity play a role. We find that moderate technological complexity improves appropriability. If imitation deterrence is paramount, then the optimal structure would be a tightly‐coupled organization. In other instances, loosely‐coupled organizations may be superior because they foster internal cumulative innovations and, if spillovers were to occur, they also maximize knowledge retrieval. Our findings suggest that all is not lost when spillovers occur and that firms can continue to benefit in downstream innovations. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

突破性创新、互补性资产与企业间合作的整合研究

主导企业在技术变革中经历了技术劣势后，这种劣势在何种程度上转化为商业劣势取决于突破性创新的破坏幅度。如果新技术只破坏了主导企业的技术能力而没有破坏互补性资产的价值．那么主导企业的绩效将会改进：如果新技术同时破坏了主导企业的技术能力和互补性资产的价值．那么主导企业的绩效将会下滑。正是由于大量突破性创新属于前者并且主导企业控制了大部分的互补性资产．开发了突破性创新的新进入企业只能与主导企业建立合作关系．共同分享创新利润。     

Repeating a familiar pattern in a new way: The effect of exploitation and exploration on knowledge leverage behaviors in technology acquisitions

Research Summary: We identify two types of knowledge leverage behaviors undertaken by acquiring firms: integrated and independent knowledge leverage. We address how the prior exploitation or exploration orientation of acquirers influence these two modes of knowledge leverage behaviors. The degree of exploitation of acquirers promotes integrating their existing knowledge with acquired knowledge in innovative actions. In contrast, the degree of exploration of acquirers increases the likelihood that new innovations will use acquired knowledge without integrating it with their prior knowledge. In addition, the firm's prior acquisition rate moderates the relationship between the acquiring firms’ previous exploitation or exploration orientation and their knowledge leverage mode. The findings of this article suggest that pre‐acquisition innovation capabilities are distinct from but influence the post‐acquisition innovation actions. Managerial Summary: Firms often undertake acquisitions to gain access to new knowledge, but they can differ dramatically in how they leverage acquired knowledge. We show that the firm's prior innovation patterns drive this choice. Firms that have previously focused on incremental innovations in their internal innovation efforts tend to integrate acquired knowledge with their own prior knowledge. In contrast, firms that have previously pursued bold innovations tend to leverage acquired knowledge alone in new innovations. Thus, we show that firms use acquisitions as a means to extend their internal innovation patterns—firms that have focused on incremental innovations extend that with acquisitions by linking new innovations to their prior knowledge while firms that have pursued bold initiatives use acquired knowledge to move in new technology directions.     

Measuring firms’ imitation activity

Although imitation is more abundant and prevalent than innovation in firms’ product and process development activities, it has been understudied in research on innovation and R&D management. For example, a valid and reliable objective firm-level measure of the intensity of imitation activity is lacking in the extant literature. This measure is necessary to understand the antecedents and consequences of firms’ imitation activity, which has implications for R&D management. In this paper, we present novel methods that employ patent infringement litigations data to improve on the validity and reliability of measuring firms’ imitation activity. We validate our proposed measure by presenting a first model and test of R&D as a multiple-output production function with R&D expenditure as the primary input, and innovation and imitation as joint outputs. This is in contrast to current R&D models as a single-output production function of either innovation or imitation. This study uses a sample of 227 public firms from the computer, semiconductor, and pharmaceutical industries in the United States during 1991–2010.     

Leveraging External Sources of Innovation: A Review of Research on Open Innovation

This paper reviews research on open innovation that considers how and why firms commercialize external sources of innovations. It examines both the “outside‐in” and “coupled” modes of open innovation. From an analysis of prior research on how firms leverage external sources of innovation, it suggests a four‐phase model in which a linear process—(1) obtaining, (2) integrating, and (3) commercializing external innovations—is combined with (4) interaction between the firm and its collaborators. This model is used to classify papers taken from the top 25 innovation journals, complemented by highly cited work beyond those journals. A review of 291 open innovation‐related publications from these sources shows that the majority of these articles indeed address elements of this inbound open innovation process model. Specifically, it finds that researchers have front‐loaded their examination of the leveraging process, with an emphasis on obtaining innovations from external sources. However, there is a relative dearth of research related to integrating and commercializing these innovations. Research on obtaining innovations includes searching, enabling, filtering, and acquiring—each category with its own specific set of mechanisms and conditions. Integrating innovations has been mostly studied from an absorptive capacity perspective, with less attention given to the impact of competencies and culture (including “not invented here”). Commercializing innovations puts the most emphasis on how external innovations create value rather than how firms capture value from those innovations. Finally, the interaction phase considers both feedback for the linear process and reciprocal innovation processes such as cocreation, network collaboration, and community innovation. This review and synthesis suggests several gaps in prior research. One is a tendency to ignore the importance of business models, despite their central role in distinguishing open innovation from earlier research on interorganizational collaboration in innovation. Another gap is a tendency in open innovation to use “innovation” in a way inconsistent with earlier definitions in innovation management. The paper concludes with recommendations for future research that include examining the end‐to‐end innovation commercialization process, and studying the moderators and limits of leveraging external sources of innovation.     

Appropriability regime for radical and incremental innovations

In the present day markets, new product development and innovation are essential for value creation. Innovation, however, hardly provides benefits if rivals are able to copy it with little or no extra cost. Consequently, being able to build an appropriability regime that provides effective protection against imitation and enables getting returns on investments in innovation is necessary. The problem is that choosing the methods to protect different kinds of innovations is not straightforward. In this paper we study appropriating from radical and incremental innovations. It is widely known that many significant differences exist between the two innovation types, and the appropriability conditions are no exception. Empirical evidence on the topic is provided by analyzing survey data collected among 299 companies. As a result, the effects of environmental dynamism and research and development (R&D) intensity on radical and incremental innovation are illustrated, and knowledge is provided on the role of the appropriability regime in enhancing the potential to profit from radical and incremental innovations.     

The Effects of Market Network Heterogeneity on Innovation Diffusion: An Agent‐Based Modeling Approach

Innovations usually have an initial impact on very few people. The period of learning or early evaluation precedes the diffusion of the technology into the wider addressed population. More than a transfer, this is best characterized as communication of benefits, costs, and compatibility with earlier technologies and a relative assessment of the new state of the art. Innovation development by an organization or individual creates not just a device (i.e., process or tacit knowledge) but concomitantly a capacity on the part of other organizations or persons to use, adopt, replicate, enhance, or modify the technology, skills, or knowledge for their own purposes. How innovations actually diffuse is to understand the communication of progress, and this framing helps one to design innovations and also design the marketing and testing programs to ready innovations for market and launch them efficiently. Diffusion theory's main focus is on the flow of information within a social system, such as via mass media and word‐of‐mouth communications. This theory presents often in the form of mathematical models of innovation and imitation. Distinct from classical diffusion models, however, consumers are not all identical in how they connect to others within a market or how they respond to information. We examine the effects of various network structures and relational heterogeneity on innovation diffusion within market networks. Specifically, network topology (the structure of how individuals in the market are connected) and the strength of communication links between innovator and follower market segments (a form of relational heterogeneity) are studied. Several research questions concerning network heterogeneity are addressed with an agent‐based modeling approach. The present study's findings are based on simulation results that show important effects of network structure on the diffusion process. The ability to speed diffusion varies significantly according to within‐ and cross‐segment communications within a heterogeneous network structure. The implications of the present approach for new product diffusion are discussed, and future research directions are suggested that may add useful insights into the complex social networks inherent to diffusion. A simple summary is that discovery of significant prime communicator nodes in a network allows innovation development practices to be better calibrated to realistically multiple market segments.     

The Effect of Family Involvement on Innovation Outcomes: The Moderating Role of Board Social Capital

Innovation is an essential and yet puzzling part of family firms’ strategic focus. While family firms are generally characterized as conservative regarding their research and development (R&D) activities, researchers have recently argued that family firms can still achieve innovation-based competitive advantages. Seeking to understand the link between family influence and the outcomes of innovation, we suggest that it is necessary not only to observe the depth of family involvement, but also to differentiate between technological inventions and market innovations. We further posit that the board members’ social capital constitutes an important contingency for this link. We, therefore, investigate the relationship between family involvement and two different outcomes: the number of the firm’s inventions and the market relevance of innovations. Our analysis of S&P 500 firms comprises 1.85 million patents and manual evaluations of 1774 product announcements. The results of our estimations suggest that family involvement is negatively related to the number of inventions and positively related to the market relevance of innovations. They further show that internal and external board social capital moderate the relationship between family involvement and the number of inventions. This study adds to the discussion about family firm innovation by using socioemotional wealth to explain heterogeneity in innovation patterns and revealing that relational resources derived from board social capital are crucial boundary conditions for families’ influence on technological inventions. Taken together, it works toward a more holistic view of innovation in family-influenced firms.     

Diversity of Board Interlocks and the Impact on Technological Exploration: A Longitudinal Study

Scholars have given increased attention to organizational networks as an important component of technological innovation. Although a significant body of research has examined the implications of organizational networks on knowledge diffusion, researchers know little about the impacts that diverse network interlocks have on corporate innovation outputs. To address this gap in the literature, this article draws upon insights from organizational learning and social network theory and argues that interlocked networks affect corporate innovation. Further, interlocks differ in terms of both the heterogeneity of tied‐to firms—ties created through shared board directors—and the directors who create these ties. Accordingly, this study proposes that more diverse interlocks will have a greater impact on corporate technological exploration. To test this proposal, data from multiple sources were analyzed, including historical records of board appointments and data on technological innovations from U.S. public companies. Empirical results from generalized estimating equations suggest that the industrial diversity of interlocked firms increases the likelihood of technological exploration. Moreover, interlocks with R&D‐intensive firms are more important for technological exploration than those created by firms that do not invest heavily in R&D. There is no empirical evidence demonstrating that the ratio of interlocks created by directors with output‐oriented experience enhances technological exploration. Overall, this research reveals that diversity of leader‐created board interlocks can be an important mechanism for fostering corporate entrepreneurial activities such as technological exploration.     

Heading for new shores: Do service and hybrid innovations outperform product innovations in industrial companies?

This study investigates the financial outcomes of product, service, and hybrid innovations in industrial markets. To date, empirical research has focused on product innovations, yet industrial firms are increasingly competing with innovative services to maintain their competitive edge. This study assesses the financial impact of service and hybrid innovations compared with more traditional product innovations. We develop a unique data set that combines information on companies' innovation activities with objective financial data. From a sample of 348 German industrial firms, the analysis reveals that service innovations do not outperform product innovations in industrial markets. A focus on service innovations only pays off in highly price-conscious markets. In contrast, hybrid innovations, referring to the simultaneous market introduction of new products and services, have a positive effect on firm performance above and beyond pure product innovations. This effect is particularly pronounced in competitive markets and under conditions of high customer concentration. In sum, this study demonstrates that hybrid innovations outperform both, pure product and service innovations in industrial markets.     

资本市场压力与企业策略性专利行为:卖空机制的视角

创新是一种不确定性高且周期长的投资活动,需要风险偏好更大、对失败容忍更高的市场环境,而资本市场具有筛选和发现创新型企业、有效分散创新风险的功能,因而对创新活动起着关键作用。然而,中国资本市场短期投资者比例高,融券交易成本高且交易不活跃,加上专利评价体系对不同质量的专利区分度较低,导致资本市场压力对创新活动没有发挥出信息机制和治理机制两种效应。相反,资本市场压力带来的负面信息表达渠道和管理层短期业绩压力,造成了中国专利申请中存在“重数量、轻质量”“重申请、轻维护”的企业策略性专利行为所衍生的“专利泡沫”问题。本文采用中国融资融券制度作为准自然实验,考察卖空机制对企业创新的影响效应和作用机理。研究发现,企业面临卖空压力时会更加积极地申请专利,但专利的申请质量有所下降,表现为专利授权率降低;专利结构有所恶化,最终授权数增加的主要是容易研发、授权快的实用新型专利和外观设计专利;专利得到授权后,企业放弃缴纳维持费用以终止专利权。这些策略性专利行为在短期内可以减少企业的卖空交易量,推高企业市值,但长期看对企业的业绩没有积极影响,是一种“创新假象”。卖空机制主要通过施压机制来影响企业创新,管理层业绩压力、外部监督压力、股价信息传递压力越大的企业,在面临卖空威慑时更有动力进行策略性专利行为。为促进企业创新向高质量发展,需要进一步完善融资融券制度和专利评价体系。     

Social and organizational capital: Building the context for innovation

In the light of the key role intellectual capital has for firms' innovation capability, this paper analyzes the influence of two of their dimensions, organizational capital and social capital, on firms' product innovation, and the moderating role of radicalness. Unlike previous studies, the unit of analysis will not be the firm, but the R&D department. Thus, our research, conducted with a sample of Spanish industrial companies, provides a new insight with interesting results. First, our findings show that social capital favours firms' product innovation, especially under radical innovations. Second, organizational capital has an indirect effect on product innovation through positive influence on social capital. This implies that firms can stimulate communication and interaction among people, and therefore innovative activity, by means of explicit and codified knowledge (organizational capital).     

Bigger and safer: the diffusion of competitive advantage

Research on the diffusion of technologies that give competitive advantage is needed to understand the role of technology in competition. Predictions on which firms first obtain useful technologies are made by cluster theory, which holds that the diffusion is geographically bounded, and network theory, which holds that adoption is more rapid in central network positions. These predictions can be evaluated using data on the diffusion of supplier innovations that give competitive advantage to firms in the buyer industry. Here, the diffusion of new ship types is studied using the heterogeneous diffusion model and data on shipping firm‐shipbuilder networks, showing that valuable innovations remain rare because they are not adopted by distant firms in geographical and network space. The strong influence of geographically dispersed interfirm networks on technology diffusion justifies a greater role of interorganizational networks in the theory of competitive advantage. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Value chain innovations for technology transfer in developing and emerging economies: Conceptual issues,typology, and policy implications

The adoption of modern technologies in agriculture is crucial for improving productivity of poor farmers and poverty reduction. However, the adoption of modern technology has been disappointing. The role of value chains in technology adoption has been largely ignored so far, despite the dramatic transformation and spread of modern agri-food value chains. We argue that value chain organization and innovations can have an important impact on modern technology adoption, not just by downstream companies, but also by farmers. We discuss conceptual issues and provide an empirical typology of institutional innovations through which value chains can contribute to technology transfer to agriculture in developing and emerging countries.     

The Antecedents and Consequences of Affordable Value Innovations for Emerging Markets

Emerging markets offer tremendous growth opportunities for firms. While established multinational firms typically focus on premium segments in emerging markets, they often fail to leverage additional growth opportunities in so‐called good enough or low‐income segments in emerging markets. Customers in these low‐income markets have substantially different requirements and are very price sensitive. Theoretical and case‐based research suggests that innovating for these low‐income segments in emerging markets differs significantly from innovating for premium or traditional Western markets. We argue that tapping successfully into low‐income segments in emerging markets requires the development of new products that meet the low price expectations while at the same time offering also value to customers in these segments. We refer to these new products as affordable value innovations. We analyze the antecedents of affordable value innovation for emerging markets. We draw on institutional theory to derive three potentially relevant antecedents of affordable value innovation for emerging markets. These are bricolage, local embeddedness, and standardization. We test our hypotheses using multiple informant data from 47 multinational corporations involving 103 innovation projects that target low‐income customers in emerging markets. Our empirical analysis shows that all three antecedents have significant effects on the level of affordable value innovation: while bricolage and local embeddedness are positively related to the level of affordable value innovation, standardization has a negative impact. We also examine the relationship between the level of affordable value innovation and performance. We find evidence for our basic assumption that a firm's capability to develop and launch affordable value innovations is key to success in emerging markets. It indicates that a firm's investments in affordable value innovations for emerging markets pay off financially. Finally, a cross‐regional comparison of our data shows that the key findings on antecedents of affordable value innovation and its impact on performance do not vary across various emerging markets. Overall, our findings offer important implications for research on and the practice of innovation for low‐income segments in emerging markets.     

Global integration and innovation: Multicountry knowledge generation within MNCs

This paper examines both conditions that can enable collaborative and combinative knowledge generation within multinational corporations (MNCs) and benefits that firms can achieve from these types of innovations. I posit that more basic relationships that have been established through manufacturing integration can enable multicountry collaborative innovations and that these innovations will bring together diverse knowledge that is likely to spawn further innovation within firms. Empirical analysis of a panel that includes comprehensive and confidential data on the worldwide operations of U.S. MNCs and their worldwide patents reveals robust support for these arguments. Overall, this paper broadens extant research on knowledge generation within MNCs by exploring both the antecedents and benefits of multicountry collaborative innovations. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.