Radical Product Innovation Capability: Literature Review,Synthesis, and Illustrative Research Propositions

Product innovation is a key to organizational renewal and success. Relative to other forms of innovation, radical product innovations offer unprecedented customer benefits, substantial cost reductions, or the ability to create new businesses, any of which should lead to superior organizational performance. In other words, a radical product innovation capability is a dynamic capability, one that enables the organization to maintain alignment with rapidly evolving customer needs in high‐velocity environments. Extensive research has been conducted on the antecedents to an incremental/general product innovation capability, and meta‐analyses have been conducted to integrate the results from the various studies. However, whether and how a radical product innovation capability differs from an incremental product innovation capability is also critical. The purpose of this work is to develop a testable model of the antecedents to radical product innovation success. Based on an extensive literature review, a comprehensive set of organizational components that comprise a firm's radical product innovation capability is identified. These organizational components include senior leadership, organizational culture, organizational architecture, the radical product innovation development process, and the product launch strategy. Of course, each of these components has subcomponents that provide even more texture. This review highlights how the components of a radical innovation capability function differently from those for an incremental capability. In addition, this review strongly suggests that the direct effects models that dominate this literature underestimate the complexity of the interplay of components that comprise a radical product innovation capability. Thus, a model to demonstrate this interplay of these organizational components is provided. Illustrative research propositions are offered to provide guidance to researchers. Suggestions for executives and managers who are involved in the product development process and for scholars who seek to advance the state of knowledge in this area are offered in the conclusion.     

Ambidextrous Idea Generation—Antecedents and Outcomes*

Ambidexterity, defined as the capability to develop both incremental and radical innovations, is an important driver of firm success. Idea generation is an essential starting point for both types of innovation. Therefore, this study investigates whether ambidextrous idea generation, defined as the capability to actively generate both incremental and radical ideas, affects new product development (NPD) success. Analyses on the Comparative Performance Assessment Study (CPAS) data, which includes data from 453 companies distributed over 24 countries, demonstrate that ambidextrous idea generation does indeed affect NPD program success. Consequently, this study also investigates which antecedents foster ambidextrous idea generation. The innovation paradox concept predicts that achieving ambidexterity requires overcoming paradoxical antecedents. Therefore, we tested whether combinations of financial and breakthrough orientations (the paradox of strategic emphasis), a formal innovation process and an innovation culture (the paradox of innovation drivers), tight and loose customer coupling (the paradox of customer orientation), and internal development and external collaboration (the paradox of openness) affects ambidextrous idea generation. The results show that only customer orientation and openness have the expected inverted u‐shaped effect. These finding are in line with construal level theory, which predicts that the organizational characteristics that influence idea‐generation activity must be at the same construal level to have the desired effect. The contribution of this study is twofold. First, the analyses indicate that ambidextrous idea generation has significant repercussions for the entire NPD program. Second, the results show that resolving innovation paradoxes only has an effect if the construal level of the paradox and the activity match. This finding indicates an important boundary condition for the innovation paradox concept.     

Organizing for Radical Innovation: An Exploratory Study of the Structural Aspects of RI Management Systems in Large Established Firms

To escape the intense competition of today's global economy, large established organizations seek growth options beyond conventional new product development that leads to incremental changes in current product lines. Radical innovation (RI) is one such pathway, which results in organically driven growth through the creation of whole new lines of business that bring new to the world performance features to the market and may result in the creation of entirely new markets. Yet success is elusive, as many have experienced and scholars have documented. This article reports results of a three-year, longitudinal study of 12 large established firms that have declared a strategic intent to evolve their RI capabilities. In contrast to other academic research that has analyzed specific projects to understand management practices appropriate for RI, the present research reported explores the evolution of management systems for enabling radical innovation to occur repeatedly in large firms and reports on one aspect of this management system: organizational structures for enabling and nurturing RI. To consider organizational structure as a venue for capability development is new in the management of innovation and dynamic capabilities literatures. Conventional wisdom holds that RIs should be incubated outside the company and assimilated once they have gained traction in the marketplace. Numerous experiments with organizational structures were observed that instead work to manage the interfaces between the RI management system and the mother organization. These structures are described here, and insights are drawn out regarding radical innovation competency requirements, transition challenges, senior leadership mandates, and business-unit ambidexterity. The centerpiece of this research is the explication of the Discovery–Incubation–Acceleration framework, which details three sets of necessary, though not sufficient competencies, for building an RI capability.     

Product Development as Core Competence: How Formal Product Development Practices Differ for Radical,More Innovative,and Incremental Product Innovations

Although universally recognized as an important consideration in building product development (PD) competency, the effect of a firm's ability to vary its PD practices to develop winning products has been given scant attention in large‐scale, multiorganizational, quantitative studies. This research explores differences in formal new PD practices among three project types—incremental, more innovative, and radical. Using a sample of 380 business units, this research investigates how development practices differ across these three classes of innovation with respect to the formal PD process, project organization, PD strategy, organizational culture, and senior management commitment. Our results diverge from several commonly held beliefs about formal PD processes and the management of radical versus incremental innovations. Our results indicate that radical projects are managed less flexibly than incremental projects. Instead of being an offshoot of less strategic planning, radical projects are just as strategically aligned as incremental projects. Instead of being informally introduced entrepreneurial adventures, radical projects are often the result of more formal ideation methods. While these results may be counterintuitive to suppositional models of how to radical innovation happens, it is the central theme of this research to show how radical innovation actually happens. Our findings also provide a foundation for reexamining the role of control in the management of innovation. As the level of innovativeness increased, so too did the amount of controls imposed—e.g., less flexibility in the development process, more professional, full‐time project leadership, centralized executive oversight for new products, and formal financial assessments of expected NP performance.     

Customer and Supplier Involvement in Design: The Moderating Role of Incremental and Radical Innovation Capability

More and more firms are leveraging design as a resource to gain the upper hand in today's competitive business market. To this end, this study draws on the resource‐based view (RBV) of the firm to examine the relationship between customer and supplier involvement in the design process and new product performance. The research also extends the RBV to a contingency lens by introducing product innovation capability (incremental and radical) as a moderator to draw the boundary conditions of the impact of customer/supplier involvement in design on new product performance. Using data collected from Canadian high‐tech companies, the findings provide strong support for the hypotheses in that customer involvement in design helps new product performance under high incremental innovation capability but harms new product performance under high radical innovation capability. In contrast, supplier involvement in design was beneficial to new product performance under both high incremental and radical innovation capability. The managerial implications for the role of design under different innovation capabilities are discussed.     

Inbound open innovation for enhanced performance: Enablers and opportunities

Open innovation, defined as a firm's purposive pursuit and integration of external inputs for new product development, offers an alternative perspective on innovation. Drawing on resource-based and capability theories, this study identifies key factors that enable inbound open innovation and increase its efficacy in a business-to-business context. Because open innovation relies on external connections, relational capability—that is, the firm's ability to make and manage relationships with other firms—should enhance the effects of inbound open innovation on firm performance. Two key resources may further enhance the moderating effects of relational capability: network spillovers that indicate knowledge-rich surroundings, and flexibility that allows for responsiveness and adaptability. The authors test these relationships with data from managers in 204 business-to-business high-tech firms, as well as secondary data pertaining to firm performance and flexibility. The results support the expectations that the ability to build interfirm relationships in a knowledge-rich environment increase the efficacy of inbound open innovation for gaining superior financial performance. Interestingly, additional analyses suggest an unexpected nonlinear interaction effect with flexibility. When firms possess strong relational capabilities and adopt an open innovation approach, they achieve higher financial performance if they have a low or a high level of flexibility. The theoretical and managerial implications of these findings are discussed.     

How Firms Develop Capabilities for Crowdsourcing to Increase Open Innovation Performance: The Interplay between Organizational Roles and Knowledge Processes

In recent years, crowdsourcing has emerged as a promising open innovation strategy for firms searching for solutions to technical problems. Previous research has shown that crowdsourcing can provide quick access to distant knowledge at relatively low costs, when compared to other forms of innovation governance such as internal sourcing or contract research. Recent studies, however, indicate that firms differ considerably in their ability to reap the benefits from crowdsourcing. Drawing upon recent work on the microfoundations of capabilities, we hypothesize how three types of lower level organizational elements may affect gains from crowdsourcing: informal organizational roles, formal organizational roles, and knowledge processes. Following a mixed‐method research design and drawing on rich quantitative and qualitative data, we find that informal and formal organizational roles work through processes of knowledge articulation and codification in developing a firm’s crowdsourcing capability. By going beyond the direct effects of the three antecedents, our research sheds light on the process of capability development for open innovation.     

Whom Should We Talk to? Investigating the Varying Roles of Internal and External Relationship Quality on Radical and Incremental Innovation Performance

Research suggests that close relationships with internal and external partners are likely to have a significant impact on new product development (NPD). What is unclear is how the effects of internal and external relationships influence development paths for different types of innovations. Prior literature indicates that the pathways for developing incremental innovations differ considerably from those for radical innovations. Thus it is plausible that the effects of external versus internal relationships vary across these two innovation types. This paper uses the 2012 Comparative Performance Assessment Study (CPAS) data set to investigate the roles of internal and external relationship quality on the development of both incremental and radical innovations. The results find that internal and not external relationship quality is beneficial for the development of incremental innovations. When driven by internal relationships, a flexible NPD process is advantageous for the financial performance of incremental innovations. Meanwhile external and not internal relationship quality is valuable for developing radical innovations. External relationship quality results in process flexibility, leading to project execution success and subsequent financial performance for radical innovations. As expected, project execution success consistently leads to increased financial performance. These findings indicate the critical differences in types of relationship quality required when developing new products based on radical versus incremental innovations.     

Incapability of Technological Capability: A Case Study on Product Innovation in the Japanese Facsimile Machine Industry

Technological leadership in an industry certainly seems like a ticket to ongoing success. However, overemphasis on existing technological capabilities may produce a form of myopia in product development. In other words, by focusing primarily on developing and improving their core technologies, organizations miss opportunities to exploit new technologies and thus create breakthrough products. Ken Kusunoki proposes that problem-solving approaches in a technologically leading firm paradoxically may impede radical product innovation. Suggesting that such firms are inherently oriented toward incremental innovation, he presents a conceptual framework of the dynamic interaction between technological and product development problem-solving in the context of product innovation. He then illustrates this conceptual framework by examining a case of radical innovation in the Japanese facsimile industry. For a technological leader, product innovation typically is driven by technology development. In other words, such a firm quite reasonably relies on the technological advantage it holds over competitors as the basis for its product developments. By refining and enhancing its industry-leading technological capabilities, the firm can successfully introduce incremental innovations in its products. Because of this strong emphasis on exploiting existing technological capabilities, however, the technological leader may fail to capitalize on new technologies that can produce radical innovations. In the race to develop high-speed, digital facsimile equipment during the early 1970s, for example, Matsushita held a decided technological advantage over competitors such as Ricoh. Notwithstanding Matsushita's technological edge, however, Ricoh brought this radical innovation to market two years before Matsushita introduced its first digital machine, causing a serious decline in Matsushita's market share. Ricoh's approach to technological and product problem-solving—an autonomous team structure, with a strong project manager and frequent transfers of engineers among interdependent units—contrasts dramatically with Matsushita's functional structure and strong emphasis on technological problem-solving. Interestingly, Matsushita regained its technological advantage by 1976, thanks to a rapid series of incremental innovations in its product technologies.     

互动导向对企业产品创新绩效的影响研究——基于知识协同的中介作用

本文选取245个有效样本,采用结构方程模型分析和回归分析等方法来探索互动导向对企业产品创新绩效的影响,并探讨知识协同的中介作用。研究结果表明：互动导向的3个维度（互动承诺、互动能力和互动关系）均对产品创新绩效具有显著的正向影响,且知识协同在互动承诺、互动能力和互动关系与产品创新绩效的关系中起中介作用。     

Radical innovation through internal corporate venturing: Degussa's commercialization of nanomaterials

Internal corporate venturing enables radical innovation within established firms in mature markets. Without effectively designed and managed internal corporate ventures, the organizational constraints of established firms will strongly favour incremental innovation over radical innovation. This paper investigates the evolution of a successful internal corporate venture within a large, incumbent chemical firm, now known as Evonik Degussa, to reveal the challenges, organizational design, and management strategies of their commercialization of radical nanomaterials technology. The commercialization of nanomaterials technology is of great interest to incumbent materials and chemical firms and to independent ventures, but the radical, generic, and capital intensive nature of nanomaterials technology requires organizational and managerial innovation. This case study demonstrates a model to enable growth through radical innovation in nanomaterials, while taking advantage of an incumbent firm's capabilities and complementary assets. Organizational strategies include incubation from a risk-adverse culture, relatively long timelines for evaluation, and a high-level steering committee. Managerial strategies focus on product development, risk reduction, and active risk management.     

Complements or Substitutes? Internal Technological Strength,Competitor Alliance Participation,and Innovation Development

While a firm can choose to develop an innovation internally or externally, the internal knowledge development and external knowledge acquisition tend to interact with each other in the innovation process. The present study examines whether internal technological strength and external competitor alliance participation serve as complements or substitutes in innovation development. Built on the knowledge‐based view, this study offers a contingency perspective on the nature of knowledge integration between internal technological strength and external alliance relationships, and how they jointly influence radical and incremental innovation differently. Adopting a random effect negative binomial model specification, a panel data set of 64 pharmaceutical firms over a 15‐year period were used to test the hypothesized effects. The findings indicate that internal technological knowledge strength has an inverted U‐shaped relationship with radical and incremental innovation. More importantly, the findings also demonstrate that the combined effect of internal and external sources of innovation can have differential effects on radical and incremental innovation development. Specifically, competitor alliance participation strengthens the effect of internal technological strength on incremental product innovation while it weakens the above effect on radical product innovation. This suggests that internal and external sources of innovation may complement each other for incremental innovation while they may represent trade‐offs for radical innovation development. The above findings provide empirical evidence for the complexity of pursuing organizational ambidexterity in innovation generation and highlight the importance of balancing the internal and external knowledge sources in pursuing innovation.     

Consistency Matters in Formally Selecting Incremental and Radical New Product Ideas for Advancement

Several new product development (NPD) scholars have argued that formal processes should be used when selecting incremental new product ideas for advancement at the very beginning of the fuzzy front end (FFE), but that such formal processes may be less beneficial when selecting radical new product ideas. However, arguments also exist for using formal idea selection processes for both types of new product ideas. In practice, informal processes are used for selecting both idea types and more formal processes are used for selecting radical ideas. Unequivocal empirical evidence for either of the opposing views or practices is lacking. This study sheds light on this matter using data from 161 of the firms that participated in the Product Development and Management Association's latest (2012) Comparative Performance Assessment Study. The results reveal that the highest idea success rate (i.e., the proportion of selected ideas that are eventually launched as new products and are successful in the marketplace) is associated with firms’ use of formal processes to select the vast majority of both incremental and radical new product ideas for advancement. This finding supports earlier claims that even for (raw) idea selection processes that take place at the very beginning of the FFE, managers need to adopt a portfolio perspective and consistently use formal idea advancement selection processes to ensure attaining the right balance between radical and incremental projects in later stages of the NPD pipeline to enhance overall NPD success. Notably, this finding shows that common managerial practices of using inconsistent approaches for selecting radical and incremental ideas for advancement need to be reconsidered.     

Speeding Up the Pace of New Product Development

This study empirically investigates a wide array of factors that have been argued to differentiate fast from slow innovation processes from the perspective of the research and development organization. We test the effects of strategic orientation (criteria- and scope-related variables) and organizational capability (staffing- and structuring-related variables) on the speed of 75 new product development projects from ten large firms in several industries. Backward-elimination regression analysis revealed that (a) clear time-goals, longer tenure among team members, and parallel development increased speed, whereas (b) design for manufacturability, frequent product testing, and computer-aided design systems decreased speed. However, when projects were sorted by magnitude of change, different factors were found to influence the speed of radical and incremental projects. Moreover, some factors that sped up radical innovation (e.g., concept clarity, champion presence, co-location) were found to slow down incremental innovation. Together, the radical and incremental models explain differences in speed better than the general model. This suggests a contingency approach to speeding up innovation. Implications for researchers and managers are discussed.     

Capability erosion dynamics

The notion of capability is widely invoked to explain differences in organizational performance, and research shows that strategically relevant capabilities can be both built and lost. However, while capability development is widely studied, capability erosion has not been integrated into our understanding of performance heterogeneity. To understand erosion, we study two software development organizations that experienced diverging capability trajectories despite similar organizational and technological settings. Building a simulation‐based theory, we identify the adaptation trap, a mechanism through which managerial learning can lead to capability erosion: well‐intentioned efforts by managers to search locally for the optimal workload balance lead them to systematically overload their organization and, thereby, cause capabilities to erode. The analysis of our model informs when capability erosion is likely and strategically relevant. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What we will do versus what we can do: The relative effects of unit‐level NPD motivation and capability

Although a firm's innovation performance has been commonly attributed to its innovative capability, in a study of 102 Chinese automobile assemblers, we find that employees' collective motivation for new product development (NPD) is more important than NPD capability in determining firms' innovation performance. This finding suggests that researchers need to simultaneously consider both unit‐level capability and unit‐level motivation in studying the mechanisms that drive innovation. Furthermore, our results indicate that a firm's strategic orientation focusing on NPD affects its employees' collective NPD motivation and NPD capability through relevant, mediating HRM practices. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Assessing resources, logistics service capabilities, innovation capabilities and the performance of container shipping services in Taiwan

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationships between resource, logistics service capability, innovation capability and the performance of Taiwanese container shipping service firms based on the resource-based view (RBV). A structural equation modeling (SEM) approach was employed to test the research hypotheses. Results indicated that resource had a significant positive effect on logistics service capabilities and innovation capabilities. In addition, the findings indicated that logistics service capability had a positive effect on the performance of container shipping service firms. However, resource and innovation capability were not found to have significantly positive effects on firms’ performance. Theoretical and managerial implications of the research findings for container shipping service firms are discussed.     

How do internal capabilities and external partnerships affect innovativeness?

How do a firm’s internal capabilities and external partnerships contribute to its product and process innovativeness? How do their impacts differ? Based on the theoretical framework of exploitation and exploration, we develop an integrative model linking the impact of both internal capabilities and external partnerships on product and process innovativeness. Survey responses from Taiwanese biotechnology firms indicate that research and development (R&;D), marketing, and manufacturing capabilities have different effects on product and process innovativeness. Of the four types of external partnerships, only partnerships with universities and research institutes seem to add value, whereas partnerships with suppliers, customers, and competitors do not contribute to innovativeness. Moreover, marketing capability and customer partnerships have a positive interaction effect on product innovativeness, while manufacturing capability and supplier partnerships have a positive interaction effect on process innovativeness.     

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).     

纺织服装企业营销系统组织创新研究——以陕北地区毛纺织服装企业为例

国内纺织服装企业适应市场能力普遍较弱,市场淘汰率较高,大多数还处于职能式进行单一的产品生产,市场反应能力较差。纺织服装企业要提高市场竞争力,就必须建立起科学、合理的营销组织机构,通过组织创新,合理地配置资源,提高企业的营销能力,从而提升企业的市场竞争力。本文在对陕北毛纺织服装产业进行深入调研的基础上,结合理论分析与实证研究,通过结构方程模型(SEM),分析了毛纺织服装企业在营销组织创新时存在的问题以及营销组织创新与营销能力和绩效间的关系,为陕西省服装企业提升市场竞争力提供具有针对性的对策建议。