The Form of Relationship between Firm‐Level Product Innovativeness and New Product Performance in Developed and Emerging Markets

This study compares the new product performance outcomes of firm‐level product innovativeness across a developed and emerging market context. In so doing, a model is constructed in which the relationship between firm‐level product innovativeness and new product performance is anticipated to be curvilinear, and in which the nature of this relationship is argued to be dependent on organizational and environmental factors. The model is tested using primary data obtained from chief executive officers and finance managers in 319 firms operating in the United Kingdom, an advanced Western market, and 221 firms from Ghana, an emerging Sub‐Saharan African market. The model is assessed using a structural equation model multigroup analysis approach with LISREL 8.5. In the United Kingdom and Ghana, the basic form of the relationship between firm‐level product innovativeness and business success is inverted U‐shaped, but the strength and/or form of this relationship changes under differing levels of market orientation, access to financial resources, and environmental dynamism. While commonalities are identified across the two countries (market orientation helps firms leverage their product innovativeness), differences are also observed across the samples. In Ghana, access to financial resources enhances the relationship between product innovativeness and new product performance, unlike in the United Kingdom where no moderation is observed. Furthermore, while U.K. firms leverage product innovativeness to their advantage in more dynamic environments, Ghanaian firms do not benefit in this way: here, high levels of innovation activity are less useful when markets are more dynamic. If the study's findings generalize, there are a number of implications for managers of both emerging and developed market businesses. First, managers in both developed and developing market firms should focus on determining and managing an optimal balance of novel and intensive product innovativeness within the context of their unique institutional environments. Second, for emerging market firms, a market orientation capability helps businesses leverage local market intelligence, enabling them to compete with multinational giants flocking to emerging markets, but typical developed market learning approaches may be insufficient for multinational firms when seeking to compete in emerging markets. Third, for emerging market firms, access to finances helps deliver product innovation success (although this is not the case for developed market firms, possibly due to strong financial institutions). Finally, unlike developed market firms, burdened by institutional voids at home, emerging market firms appear to be less capable of competing on an innovation front in more dynamic market conditions. Accordingly, policymakers in emerging markets should consider identifying ways to help businesses raise market orientation levels, and seek to create conditions that enhance access to financial capital (e.g., direct financing, matching grants, tax rebates, or rewarding firms that innovate creatively and intensely). Likewise, since environmental dynamism is likely to be a growing issue for emerging markets, efforts to help firms become more adept at keeping up with more agile developed market counterparts are needed.     

The Survival of New Products

We study the survival of new products in a market with horizontal product differentiation and rapid product turnover. Our data set consists of monthly sales for all new products in the Swedish beer market during 1989–1995. Results show that products with low and decreasing market shares have high hazard rates. The hazard rates are also dependent on firm characteristics; products from firms with the largest market shares face a greater risk of being withdrawn. We argue that high hazard rates of new products can help to explain high failure rates of new firms.     

How New Product Introductions Affect Sales Management Strategy: The Impact of Type of "Newness" of the New Product

How do firms adjust sales management strategy for new product launch? Does sales management strategy change more radically for different types of new products such as new‐to‐the‐world products versus product revisions? Because firms introducing a new product rely considerably on their sales force in the product launch effort, the types and degree of changes made in managing the selling effort are important issues. Past studies have demonstrated that firms make substantial adjustments in their sales management strategy when they introduce a new product. This study expands on previous investigations by examining whether sales management strategy changes are conditioned by the type of newness of the new product to the market and to the firm. Australian sales managers were asked to respond to a mail questionnaire concerning pre‐ and post‐new product launch sales management activities. Three groups of firms were compared: (1) those with new‐to‐the‐market and new‐to‐the‐firm products (i.e., new‐to‐the‐world products); (2) those with products new to the firm but not new to the market; and (3) those with products that are revisions to the firm and not new to the market. The study finds that firms do not make the most adjustments for products with the greatest degree of market newness—the new‐to‐the‐world types of products—except in the sales management strategy categories of compensation and supervision. In the other sales management strategy categories defined for study—organization, training, quotas and goals, and sales support as well as for all categories in the aggregate—sales management strategy changes were greatest in incidence, as measured both by the percent of firms making changes and the average number of changes per firm, when the new product was new to the firm but not new to the market. These results suggest that, because different types of new products face different competitive environments, there may be greater incentive for a not‐new‐to‐the‐market new‐to‐the‐firm product to make changes in sales strategy. Uncertainties about market size and customer location with new‐to‐the‐world products may limit the understanding of what changes to make in the strategy categories of quotas and territories. Similarly, uncertainties about product use and customer acceptance of new‐to‐the‐world products may limit the development of training and sales support materials by these firms. Instead, these firms may rely more on compensation and supervision to direct sales efforts for new‐to‐the‐world products. However, observing the market experience and performance of the first‐to‐market product can benefit firms launching a not‐new‐to‐market and new‐to‐the‐firm product, allowing them to rely more on strategy changes in training, sales support materials, organizational adjustments such as redeployments, and quotas.     

New Venture Performance in China,Japan, and the United States: The Impact of Formalized Market Information Processes

New venture companies, starting from small entities comprising entrepreneurs and their teams, start to grow in scale by instigating formalized processes to enhance management efficiency. This includes the use of formalized processes for collecting and disseminating market information. Despite the fact that utilizing market information is one of the fundamental factors of market orientation, little is known about the way market information is processed in new venture companies. The first aim of this research was to investigate the impact of formalized market information acquisition and utilization on new venture performance. The second objective was to investigate the effect of organizational formalization on the acquisition and utilization of market information in new venture firms. The final goal was to explore the extent to which these relationships vary in different cultural contexts. Based on an extensive literature review and interviews with managers in China, Japan, and the United States, a conceptual framework is developed that relates formalized market information processes to new venture performance in the three countries. The conceptual model is tested with data collected from 453 new venture companies in these countries. The results suggest that the use of a formalized process of market information utilization has a positive effect on new venture performance regardless of country. The analysis also indicates that the effect of organizational formalization, in general, differs between countries. Organizational formalization is associated with increased formalized utilization of market information only in the United States; the relationship does not apply in the two Asian countries studied. Taken together, these results suggest that in the Asian countries, organizational formalization improves information collection, while in the United States, it also improves the utilization of information throughout the organization. One implication of these results may be the potential of added benefits accruing to organizational formalization in new ventures in countries with high levels of individualism and/or high levels of power distance, where organizational power is concentrated in formal vertical reporting relationships, as opposed to informal horizontal peer‐to‐peer networks.     

Financing behaviour of R&D investment in the emerging markets: the role of alliance and financial system

This paper examines the financing behaviour of research and development (R&D) investments in emerging markets. Drawing on institutional theory and using panel data of generalized methods of moment estimation for a sample of 302 firms from 20 countries during the period 2003–2015, we find that emerging market firms tend to use internal funds for financing R&D investments. Interesting results emerged when the sample was divided as alliance and non‐alliance firms, and bank‐based and market‐based financial systems. The results show that R&D financing behaves differently for alliance and non‐alliance firms. Alliance firms use both internal and external funds for R&D investments, while non‐alliance firms do not use external funds. We also document that a country's financial system influences the choice of available sources of finance. Firms from countries that follow a bank‐based financial system tend to rely on external funds while firms from countries that follow a market‐based financial system depend more on internal funds for financing R&D investments. This study is important as it provides new evidence on financing R&D investments in emerging countries taking into account the institutional arguments of financing choices, and so should guide stakeholders about appropriate sources of R&D financing.     

Enhancing New Product Adoption at the Base of the Pyramid: A Contextualized Model

Companies are recognizing and pursuing the opportunity to serve the market known as the base of the pyramid (BOP), i.e., consumers who live in poverty in developing countries. The BOP constitutes the largest remaining global market frontier for businesses. Until recently, it has been ignored because of its seeming unattractiveness and insurmountable challenges compared with middle‐ and high‐income markets. However, BOP consumers desire and are able to pay for quality products tailored to their needs. In response, firms are developing new products specific to the demands and conditions of this low‐income population. To innovate effectively, ensuring new products are well received, firms need to know how to enhance new product adoption among these consumers despite the barriers of poverty. We address this need by developing a model of adoption contextualized to the BOP. Based on theories of innovation and poverty, and drawing on the emergent subsistence market literature, we propose that certain new product characteristics, social context dynamics, and marketing environment approaches moderate or counter some of the limits of poverty, making adoption possible. We then discuss the managerial and theoretical implications of our model for innovation practitioners and researchers.     

Market Information Acquisition,Use, and New Venture Performance*

A substantial body of existing research has linked firm performance to the acquisition and use of customer, competitor, and other market information. This paper examines the impact on new venture performance of formal processes for market information collection and use. This study hypothesizes that new venture performance will be an increasing function of both market information and use. Two moderator hypotheses are also tested. In particular, it is expected that the impact of formal market information processes will be greater in market‐driven new ventures than in technology‐driven new ventures. These hypotheses were tested using data collected from 222 Chinese new ventures. The empirical analysis confirms the positive role of formal processes in new venture performance. However, the analysis does not support the moderator hypotheses. This study finds that (1) formal processes for information acquisition are equally important in technology‐driven and market‐driven firms and (2) formal processes for information use have a greater impact on new venture performance in technology‐driven firms than in market‐driven firms.     

Factors Affecting New Product Success: Cross-Country Comparisons

Although considerable effort has been devoted to identifying the factors that contribute to new product success and failure, plenty of work remains to be done in this area. For example, many studies of this subject focus on companies in specific parts of the world (in particular, North America, Europe, and Japan). It remains to be seen whether the findings from these studies apply to the new product development (NPD) efforts of companies in other regions, let alone on a global basis. Sanjay Mishra, Dongwook Kim, and Dae Hoon Lee address this issue in a study of the factors that contribute to the success or failure of NPD efforts in South Korean firms. To explore the question of whether a global set of success factors can be identified, they compare their findings with those of similar studies conducted in Canada and China. Classifying these countries in terms of stages of economic development (with China and Canada at opposite extremes and Korea in the middle), they expect to find the greatest dissimilarities in their comparisons of China and Canada. Marketing managers from 144 Korean firms provided in formation about 288 successful and unsuccessful products. Their responses indicate that the factors most closely related to new product outcomes in Korea are market intelligence, product-firm compatibility, the nature of the new product idea (for example, whether the product idea was market derived, whether the product specifications were clearly defined by the marketplace), launch effort, and general characteristics of the new product venture (such as the product's innovativeness to the market and its technical complexity). Several of these factors were emphasized in studies of Canadian and Chinese NPD success, though respondents to those studies also highlighted the importance of the product offering and proficiency of formal NPD activities. Contrary to expectations, China and Canada show the greatest similarity among the three countries studied, in terms of the relative importance of the various NPD success factors. On the other hand, China and Korea are more similar in terms of the effects of the variables studied. In other words, if a variable is related to new product failure in Korea, that variable is most likely also related to failure in China. Although some similarities are evident among all three countries, the findings in this study do not point toward a single, global formula for NPD success.     

The Roles of Sustainability Orientation and Market Knowledge Competence in New Product Development Success

Firms’ sustainability orientation (SO) is widely understood as a strategic resource, which can lead to competitive advantage and superior (financial) performance. While recent empirical evidence suggests a moderate and positive relationship between SO and financial performance on a corporate level, little is understood about the influence of SO on new product development (NPD) success. Building on the natural‐resource‐based view (NRBV) of the firm, we hypothesize that firms’ SO positively influences NPD success, because of efficiency gains and differentiation advantages. However, scholars have also argued that the win–win paradigm postulated by NRBV might not always hold because NPD managers might find it difficult to balance sustainability objectives with the needs of their customer and the competitive dynamics in their markets. It is, therefore, proposed that market knowledge competence (MKC) is an important capability, which helps firms to balance social and ecological objectives with economic goals such as profitability and market share. Using data from 343 international firms from 24 countries that was collected by the Product Development and Management Association, structural equation modeling results suggest that (1) SO positively influences NPD and that (2) this relationship is partially mediated by firms’ market knowledge capabilities. The findings suggest that strategic‐level SO and MKC are complementary in that they help in balancing trade‐offs between sustainaility objectives and profitability goals. In this way, the study contributes to a better understanding of how critical NPD practices can help managers to translate firms’ SO into NPD success. The article concludes by highlighting implications for product innovation managers.     

Product—Market Choices and Growth of New Businesses

The relationship between product–market strategies and the growth of new firms is incompletely understood. The lack of understanding reflects the absence of a conceptual framework that would explain why certain product–market strategies achieve specified goals more effectively than do others. Prior research links product and market strategy to business growth, but does not clearly separate product line choices from market choices, and provides little guidance with respect to the sequence in which product and market changes should be made. Richard Cardozo, Karen McLaughlin, Brian Harmon, Paul Reynolds, and Brenda Miller propose a "wave" model of product–market choice, which yields hypotheses they evaluate with data from a subsample of 120 firms drawn from a representative sample of new businesses. Results yield preliminary guidelines for product–market strategy for managers of fledgling businesses.     

Why Do Firms Enter a New Product Market? A Two‐Dimensional Framework for Market Entry Motivation and Behavior

What are the energetic forces that induce established firms to enter new product markets? While most previous research has explained the economic profits expected from a new product market as firms' distinctive motivation for market entry, some recent studies also emphasize interfirm competition and benchmarking activities as another important factor that motivates firms' new market entry. To explain the established firms' diverse new product market entry behaviors, this study presents a two‐dimensional scheme of entry motivation in terms of the degrees of target market profit focus and competitor focus. The first dimension captures the economic motivation of firms' new market entry that ranges from focusing on the direct expected profits from the target market to considering more strategic/indirect benefit incentives. The second dimension captures the degree of firms' external motivation for entry affected by competitors that ranges from independent entry decisions to fully competitor‐oriented entry decisions. Using multiple‐industry survey data, the current study empirically verifies that these two entry motivation dimensions explain a great portion of actual firms' new product market entry behaviors and that they are independent of each other. Subsequently, this study validates that firms' operational size and their environmental factors like perceived technological uncertainty and competitive intensity upon new market entry affect the degrees of the two dimensions of firms' new product market entry motivation. More specifically, large firms less emphasize target‐market profits than small firms, and when perceived technological uncertainty is high, potential market entrants become less target market profit focused but more competitor focused. Under a highly competitive new market condition, firms focus on both target‐market profits and competitors. Based on the analysis of new market entry motivation dimensions, the current study proposes a new typology of established firms' market entry behaviors. The suggested typology represents the four different types of new product market entrants and examines specific characteristics and entry strategies for each type of potential entrants. This entry‐motivation framework should provide a deeper understanding of the backgrounds of entry behaviors and assist firms in developing appropriate entry strategies and in advantageously responding to rival firms' actions with regard to entry.     

The impact of firm cost and market size asymmetries on national mergers in a three-country model

This paper studies the impact of firm cost and market size asymmetries on merger decisions. I consider a model where a small and a large country compete in a third (world) market. Each of the two countries has two firms (with potentially different costs) that supply the domestic market and export to the third market. Merger decisions in the two countries are modeled as a simultaneously move game. The paper finds that firms in the large country have more incentives to merge than firms in the small country. In contrast, the government of the large country has more incentives to block a merger than the government of the small country. Thus, the model predicts that conflicts of interest between governments and firms concerning national mergers are more likely in large countries than in small ones.     

New Product Strategies of Large, Dominant Product Manufacturing Firms: An Exploratory Analysis

Although researchers have expended considerable effort exploring the links between new product strategy and firm-level performance, most studies of this subject focus on small- to medium-sized firms. Compared to smaller firms, however, large companies typically maintain broader portfolios of products and have easier access to capital markets. Such fundamental differences suggest the need for closer examination of the relationship between new product strategy and the performance of large firms. Based on a study of 459 new products introduced during a 5-year period, Richard W. Firth and V. K. Narayanan profile the new product strategies of 18 large companies. They examine the methods used to acquire new products (internal development or external sources) as well as three dimensions of each firm's new product introductions: newness of embodied technology, newness of market application, and innovativeness in the market. In other words, these profiles identify the degree to which a firm's new product introductions involve core technologies and markets that are new to the firm, as well as the degree to which the market views these products as innovative. Because new product strategy is an investment decision, the study also examines the relationship between these strategic profiles and two facets of firm-level performance: risk and return. The study identifies five archetypes of new product strategy: Innovators, who produce innovative products by using their existing resources; Investors in Technology, who focus on expanding their technological base. Searching for New Markets, firms that venture into unfamiliar markets by introducing products closely aligned with those in their existing portfolios; Business as Usual, firms that rely on existing technologies and products to serve existing markets; and Middle-of-the-Road, firms content to introduce new products rated as low to moderate along all three dimensions of the strategic profile. For new products closely aligned with their core markets and technologies, the firms in this study typically rely on internal development. To introduce products involving new technologies or market applications, they turn to acquisition from external sources. Firms that emphasized market innovativeness in their new product introductions enjoyed higher returns than less innovative firms. And contrary to conventional wisdom, they gained this advantage without an accompanying increase in risk. In other words, continual innovation might provide a large firm with the means for achieving higher returns without higher risk.     

Market Orientation and the New Product Paradox

The extant literature shows that the strength of the market orientation–performance relationship decays as the terminal measure of performance shifts from new product success to profitability to market share. As Day (1999) concluded, a broader nomological inquiry is needed to more fully understand the nature and limits of market orientation's effects. This suggests that a broader nomological inquiry is needed to fully understand the nature and limits of market orientation's effects.
Utilizing a national sample of marketing executives, the present study's purpose is to build a fuller understanding of the effects of market orientation on firm performance. Its structural equations model includes measures of new product success, profitability, and market share.
The research reinforces a strong positive relationship between market orientation and new product success. The expanded nomological network under study, however, implies barriers to market orientation's effectiveness. First, market-orientation-inspired increases in the priority firms place on "breakthrough" learning without commensurate increases in the priority placed on "breakthrough" innovation capabilities can boomerang and negatively impact new product success. Second, market-orientation-inspired new product development programs that are unable to increase market share can negatively impact profitability. These gatekeepers to the success of market orientation underscore the need for firms to coordinate a strong market orientation with resources and capabilities that increase the effectiveness of the marketing function. Without such coordination, the positive effect of market orientation on new product success may be limited to incremental innovations, and the overall effect of successful new products on profitability may be limited.     

Factors Affecting New Product Forecasting Accuracy in New Firms

This study identifies factors that seem to influence a new firm's ability to accurately forecast new product sales. William Gartner and Robert Thomas present a conceptual model and develop hypotheses that specify antecedent factors prior to new product launch, such as the founder's expertise and the marketing research methods used, as well as environmental factors occurring after product launch, such as competitive factors and market volatility, that influence new product forecasting accuracy. The hypotheses were tested with data collected from a survey of 113 new U.S. software firms. Some tentative guidelines for improving sales forecast accuracy among new firms are offered. Directions for future research are discussed.     

What Separates Japanese New Product Winners from Losers

Operating in the upper echelons of highly competitive, global markets, numerous Japanese firms enjoy well-deserved reputations for excellence in new product development. Despite this success, however, almost no research has been conducted to explore the keys to successful new product development in Japanese companies. For the most part, research in this area has focused on North American and European firms. X. Michael Song and Mark E. Parry address this gap with a study of 404 Japanese firms and 788 new product introductions. Their research explores the links between new product success and 10 factors: product advantage; marketing synergy; technological synergy; market potential; market competitiveness; market and technical understanding; senior management support; proficiency in the predevelopment planning process and in concept development and evaluation; proficiency in market research, market pretesting, and market launch; and technical proficiency. To avoid any cultural bias, development of the survey was preceded by in-depth case studies and focus group interviews with Japanese and American new product development teams. Although time-consuming and expensive, these preliminary steps were necessary for ensuring the validity of the survey contents and procedures. Notwithstanding the obvious cultural differences, the findings from this study suggest that Japanese new products professionals view the keys to success in much the same way as their North American counterparts. For the survey respondents, the most important success factor is product advantage. Other important success factors include predevelopment proficiency (that is, proficiency in the predevelopment planning process as well as in concept definition and evaluation) and marketing and technological synergy. Consistent with previous research on North American firms, market competitiveness was found to be the least important success factor. For managers who are trying to predict whether a project will result in a product advantage, several survey items may be useful as a checklist for assessing potential product advantage. In particular, these managers should consider whether the product offers potential for reducing consumer costs and expanding consumer capabilities, as well as the likelihood that the product offers improved quality, superior technical performance, and a superior benefit-to-cost ratio.     

Can me‐too products prevail? Performance of new product development and sources of idea generation in China – an emerging market

New products developed in emerging markets such as China, India and Brazil are not only sold locally but also ‘exported’ globally, suggesting a changing landscape for global innovation. Existing literature in technology learning and capability accumulation has long held the claim that, for a certain period of time in their development, firms in latecomer countries rely on their counterparts in developed countries to get new product ideas. However, existing research in this area is generally based on case studies and historical analyses; there are few empirical studies exploring the performance consequence of learning from competitors abroad. Using large‐scale, nationwide survey data from China, we explore specifically whether learning about new product ideas from leading firms in foreign countries will lead to higher performance outcomes than other sources (i.e. domestic competitors, customers, universities or internal departments) in an emerging market. Our findings suggest that Chinese firms that source new product ideas from leading firms in foreign countries achieve overwhelmingly superior performance along financial, customer and technological dimensions. Implications to the managers and policy makers are also discussed.     

Development of Trust: A Study of Interfirm Relationships in Vietnam

The radical political and economic reforms sweeping through former socialist countries during the last decade have opened rich opportunities for privately owned businesses to emerge and develop. Since the market institutions and infrastructures in these countries are largely underdeveloped, private firms in transition economies rely extensively on interfirm partnerships. This raises the question of how—in the absence of institutions that legitimate markets, contracts, and private property—managers of new business ventures develop new relationships. This paper addresses this issue through analysis of multiple subcontracting relationships formed at a private garment company in Vietnam. This analysis suggests that firms in transition economies develop interfirm trust in ways that are quite different from their counterparts in more highly developed economies.     

New Product Development Practices and Early‐Stage Firms: Two In‐Depth Case Studies

New product development practices (NPD) have been well studied for decades in large, established companies. Implementation of best practices such as predevelopment market planning and cross‐functional teams have been positively correlated with product and project success over a variety of measures. However, for small new ventures, field research into ground‐level adoption of NPD practices is lacking. Because of the risks associated with missteps in new product development and the potential for firm failure, understanding NPD within the new venture context is critical. Through in‐depth case research, this paper investigates two successful physical product‐based early‐stage firms' development processes versus large established firm norms. The research focuses on the start‐up adoption of commonly prescribed management processes to improve NPD, such as cross‐functional teams, use of market planning during innovation development, and the use of structured processes to guide the development team. This research has several theoretical implications. The first finding is that in comparing the innovation processes of these firms to large, established firms, the study found several key differences from the large firm paradigm. These differences in development approach from what is prescribed for large, established firms are driven by necessity from a scarcity of resources. These new firms simply did not have the resources (financial or human) to create multi‐ or cross‐functional teams or organizations in the traditional sense for their first product. Use of virtual resources was pervasive. Founders also played multiple roles concurrently in the organization, as opposed to relying on functional departments so common in large firms. The NPD process used by both firms was informal—much more skeletal than commonly recommended structured processes. The data indicated that these firms put less focus on managing the process and more emphasis on managing their goals (the main driver being getting the first product to market). In addition to little or no written procedures being used, development meetings did not run to specific paper‐based deliverables or defined steps. In terms of market and user insight, these activities were primarily performed inside the core team—using methods that again were distinctive in their approach. What drove a project to completion was relying on team experience or a “learn as you go approach.” Again, the driver for this type of truncated market research approach was a lack of resources and need to increase the project's speed‐to‐market. Both firms in our study were highly successful, from not only an NPD efficiency standpoint but also effectiveness. The second broad finding we draw from this work is that there are lessons to be learned from start‐ups for large, established firms seeking ever‐increasing efficiency. We have found that small empowered teams leading projects substantial in scope can be extremely effective when roles are expanded, decision power is ground‐level, and there is little emphasis on defined processes. This exploratory research highlights the unique aspects of NPD within small early‐stage firms, and highlights areas of further research and management implications for both small new ventures and large established firms seeking to increase NPD efficiency and effectiveness.     

The role of institutional arbitrage in the search for product innovation: Firm level evidence from Norway

Evolutionary theorizing conceptualizes the discovery of new products as a successful outcome from searching for innovation in which firms combine new and old knowledge and resources. Prior research has shown that the propensity for discovering new products is greatest when firms cross a technological and/or organizational boundary in the search for new knowledge. In this paper, we add a new dimension to this literature: we examine whether, and to what extent, crossing a national boundary, as when firms use knowledge from network partners in foreign countries, influences the likelihood that firms will introduce new products into the market. Drawing on theorizing on institutional arbitrage in the literature on national innovation systems (NIS) and varieties of capitalism (VOC), we propose that companies that cross a national boundary in searching for innovation are significantly more likely to introduce new products. Detailed survey data on firms; data on their network partners, including their location; and regression analysis show that the use of knowledge from actors in foreign NIS has a positive influence on product innovation.