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.     

Seller–Buyer Interactions During the Commercialization of Technological Process Innovations

For buyers and sellers alike, high-tech process innovations can be a double-edged sword. On the one hand, technological process innovations (e.g., computer hardware and software, factory automation equipment) offer buyers the potential for reduced production costs and enhanced product quality. However, early adoption of such innovations is often a risky proposition. For the seller, successful commercialization requires stimulating not only adoption, but also successful implementation of the innovation. In other words, effective management of seller—buyer relations during the development and commercialization process go a long way toward determining the success of a high-tech process innovation. Gerard A. Athaide, Patricia W. Meyers, and David L. Wilemon examine the relationship marketing activities employed by successful sellers of high-tech process innovations. They identify eight strategic marketing objectives that underlie these relationship marketing activities: product customization, information gathering on product performance, product education and training, ongoing product support, proactive political involvement (to encourage support for the innovation from the various affected parties in the buyer's organization), product demonstration and trial, real-time problem-solving assistance, and clarification of the product's relative advantage. Their findings suggest that successful sellers engage in relationship marketing activities throughout all phases of the commercialization process. Rather than simply trying to close a deal, these firms seek active involvement from potential customers, ranging from codesigning of products to seeking feedback on product-related problems or desired modifications. This broader scope of customer involvement necessitates cooperation among various groups in the seller's organization. Product development and engineering work closely with the customer during product customization. Those groups must communicate effectively with the salespeople who demonstrate the product and with the customer support people who obtain feedback and provide real-time problem-solving support. In other words, these relationship marketing activities cut across functional barriers. Consequently, a clear understanding of the buyer's needs and environment is essential throughout the seller's organization, not just in the sales and marketing departments.     

Selecting Influential Business-to-Business Customers in New Product Development: Relational Embeddedness and Knowledge Heterogeneity Considerations

This study examines how the most influential business‐to‐business (B2B) customers, both existing and potential, involved in providing input to a new product development (NPD) project influence new product advantage. As the relational literature suggests, involving customers who have had close and embedded relationships with a firm's new product organization, such as a firm's largest customers, and customers who have been involved in past collaborative activities, should lead to the development of superior products. To the contrary, the innovation literature suggests that a firm may become too close to its large, embedded customers resulting in less innovation and in lower performing products. Also, the relationship between the heterogeneity of the knowledge of the most influential customers and new product advantage is examined. A contingency perspective is hypothesized such that the degree of product newness sought in the project moderates the effects of both relational embeddedness and knowledge heterogeneity on new product advantage. Empirical findings from a sample of 137 NPD projects support this contingency view. For projects seeking to develop incremental products, where the product being developed is an extension or an enhancement to an existing product, new product advantage tended to be higher in projects using embedded or homogeneous customers. For incremental projects, projects using less‐embedded or heterogeneous customers tended to have lower product performance. For projects following a highly innovative product strategy, new product advantage tended to be higher in projects that involved heterogeneous customers. These heterogeneous customers provided NPD projects with a diversity of perspectives, competencies, and experiences that fostered significant product innovations. The study contributes to the literature by empirically testing relational and innovation theories in NPD projects and by providing evidence on the importance of relational embeddedness and knowledge heterogeneity in selecting influential customers in NPD projects.     

Value for value—The dynamics of supplier value in collaborative new product development

Suppliers are recognized as an important source of innovation. Research into supplier involvement in new product development has shown that benefits can potentially be reaped by customers. However, a relatively unexplored precondition is the willingness of suppliers to invest in their customers’ innovative efforts. In this exploratory, theory-extending research, we investigate the value that a supplier can experience from being involved in high tech firms’ new product development. We find that value comes in three forms for suppliers: (1) financial payment for sales volumes and product development services, (2) technological knowledge and product designs, and the (3) reputation of doing business with leading-edge firms Additionally, we place this in a dynamic, long-term perspective, and find indications for a positive or negative feedback effect, depending on the emphasis the buyer puts on collaborative innovation with the supplier and the extent to which suppliers can use competences, knowledge and reputation resulting from the collaboration in subsequent business development activities. The positive effect results in added value for both parties in the dyad, and the negative effect leads to the opposite.     

Technological capability,strategic flexibility,and product innovation

This paper examines the role of technological capability in product innovation. Building on the absorptive capacity perspective and organizational inertia theory, the authors propose that technological capability has curvilinear and differential effects on exploitative and explorative innovations. The findings support the proposition that though technological capability fosters exploitation at an accelerating rate, it has an inverted U‐shaped relationship with exploration. That is, a high level of technological capability impedes explorative innovation. Strategic flexibility strengthens the positive effects of technological capability on exploration, such that when strategic flexibility is high, greater technological capability is associated with more explorative innovation. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Using Product Bundling to Facilitate the Adoption Process of Radical Innovations*

Generally, radical innovations are not easily adopted in the market. Potential adopters experience difficulties to comprehend and evaluate radical innovations due to their newness in terms of technology and benefits offered. Consequently, adoption intentions may remain low. This paper proposes bundling as an instrument to address these problems. More specifically, this paper examines how consumer comprehension, evaluation, and adoption intention of radical innovations may be enhanced by bundling such products with existing products. In addition, it is argued that the proposed effects are contingent upon the level of fit perceived to exist between the radical innovation and the product that accompanies it in the bundle. Furthermore, consumers' prior knowledge may affect the influence of bundling on the innovation adoption process as the interpretation of the meaning of new products may be strongly related to prior knowledge. This study therefore investigates whether consumer prior knowledge has such a moderating effect. Hypotheses are tested by means of an experimental study with three different radical innovations and distinguishing among offering the radical innovation separately, offering the radical innovation in a bundle with moderate perceived fit between the products, and offering the radical innovation in a bundle with high perceived fit between the products. Results show that product bundling enhances the new product's evaluation and adoption intention, although it does not increase comprehension of the radical innovation. Moreover, the results show that comprehension, evaluation and adoption intention of the innovation significantly decrease when consumers perceive a moderate fit between the products in a bundle. Taken together, these findings contribute to the bundling literature by showing not only that product bundling may indeed be an effective instrument to introduce a radical innovation but also that product bundling may be counterproductive when ignoring the critical role of perceived product fit as core characteristic of a product bundle. In addition, the notion that product bundling helps to enhance the evaluation and purchase intention of new and relatively complex products suggests a suitable strategy for new product managers to enhance benefits and reduce learning costs for radical innovations. Moreover, the effects of bundling on consumer appraisals of radical innovations are also shown to depend on the level of knowledge respondents possess regarding the product category of the radical innovation. More specifically, if bundled with a familiar product, novices tend to evaluate the innovative product more positively, but for experts no such effect can be detected. As such, these results provide additional specific implications for managers when introducing radical innovations in the market. Offering a radical innovation in a product bundle could be a fruitful strategy for companies that target customers with little or no prior knowledge in the product domain.     

Knowledge management and innovation in knowledge-based and high-tech industrial markets: The role of openness and absorptive capacity

Knowledge, as resource, and technological innovation, as a dynamic capability, are key sources for firm's sustained competitive advantage and survival in knowledge-based and high-tech industries. Under this rationale has emerged a research stream where knowledge management, organizational learning, or intellectual capital, help to understand and constitute the key pieces of one of the most complex business phenomena; the ‘firm's technological advantage’. This being so, it is also true that in knowledge-based and high-tech industrial markets, competitive success comes directly from continuous technological innovations, where a single organization cannot successfully innovate in isolation; therefore, firms should rely on external relationships and networks in order to complement its knowledge domains, and then, develop better and faster innovations. In this sense, I would like to highlight the cross-fertilizing role of three constructs that are nurtured by different research traditions: ‘collaborative/open innovation’, from Strategy and Innovation Management research; ‘absorptive capacity’, from ‘A Knowledge-Based View’; and ‘market orientation’, from Marketing research.     

Balancing the Two Knowledge Dimensions in Innovation Efforts: An Empirical Examination among Pharmaceutical Firms

This study investigates the relationships between the two knowledge dimensions (knowledge breadth and knowledge depth) and two types of innovations (radical innovation and incremental innovation). While existing literature identifies knowledge in general as an important driver of innovation, the exact relationships between knowledge breadth/depth and incremental/radical innovations are not clear. Drawing from the knowledge‐based view, this study advances the understanding of the relationships between knowledge dimensions and types of innovations by hypothesizing a nonlinear relationship between knowledge breadth and radical innovation as well as a nonlinear relationship between knowledge depth and incremental innovation. Furthermore, the moderating effects of the interaction between knowledge breadth and knowledge depth on the above‐mentioned relationships are also examined. Due to the different natures of the two types of innovations, it is hypothesized that knowledge depth positively moderates the relationship between knowledge breadth and radical innovation while knowledge breadth negatively moderates the relationship between knowledge depth and incremental innovation. To empirically test the hypotheses, secondary data from multiple sources were collected on 64 pharmaceutical firms over 15 years. Due to the panel data structure and observed dispersion issues in the dependent variables, negative binomial random effects models were formulated to test the hypotheses. The statistical results largely support the proposed hypotheses. The results demonstrate that while knowledge breadth positively contributes to the development of radical innovations and knowledge depth positively contributes to the development of incremental innovations, both relationships are subject to diminishing returns. Furthermore, while the finding did support the negative moderating effect of the knowledge breadth on incremental innovation, the positive moderating effect of knowledge depth on radical innovation is not supported. While the effect is not explicitly hypothesized, knowledge breadth seems to have a direct impact on incremental innovation as well.     

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。     

Technological and Design Innovation Effects in Regional New Product Rollouts: A European Illustration

Firms are increasingly recognizing the importance of understanding regional dynamics and their effects on competitiveness. One such area that is gaining increased importance due to intra‐regional trade is the factors contributing to the successful rollouts of new products within a region. New product rollouts are complicated by nature but are further compounded by intricacies in the type of innovation (i.e., technological or design) being introduced into a region. Unfortunately, limited research has investigated this area. This study works to address this limitation by examining the per country performance effects of regional new product rollouts of technological and design innovations. The study examines the introduction of 14 technological innovations and 12 design innovations across 17 unique firms operating in eight European countries from 2000 to 2007. Specifically, this study attempts to show (1) an important role of the type of innovation on a firm's regional new product rollout strategy; (2) a relationship between national culture and the effectiveness of regional rollout strategies; and (3) an influence of economic openness on the type of innovation for regional new product rollout strategies. The results indicate that a longer regional new product rollout strategy is a more effective strategy for technological innovations, while a shorter regional new product rollout strategy is a more effective strategy for design innovations. The study also presents significant interaction effects in relation to the cultural dimensions of uncertainty avoidance and power distance as well as a significant effect of economic openness. Implications for practitioners and academics are presented.     

Technological and non-technological innovations,performance and propensity to innovate across industries: The case of an emerging economy

Innovation in a firm may be non-technological, such as organizational and marketing innovation, and technological, such as product and process innovation. The aim of this article is to explore how different types of innovation affect the innovation development of the firm across industries. We chose Chile as an emerging market context. Our results show that only product innovations affect significantly innovation performance across industries. However, different types of propensities to innovate are affected differently by technological and non-technological innovations. We discuss implications for managers and policy makers in emerging economies, in which data tends to be scarce to develop new policy models and increase the effect of non-technological innovation on innovative performance.     

How business methods accompany technological innovations – a case study using semantic patent analysis and a novel informetric measure

Usually, the development of a technology interacts with the development of business methods, which are needed to enter the application fields. For some years now, it is possible to analyse their interaction as, next to technological innovations, business method innovations can be patented. To investigate this interplay, we select the case of radio frequency identification devices (RFID) – a technology that first emerged many years ago, but is still undergoing further development. We analyse approximately 37,000 patents related to RFID technology from the period between 1990 and 2014, differentiating between technological and business method patents, by means of bibliographic and semantic analyses, using one well established and one novel informetric measure. Contrary to our expectations, the results point to technological innovations that are not ensued but constantly accompanied by business methods. Furthermore, we identify two types of players, that is technology and application specialists. There is a clear distinction between these two types, though all companies of both types apply for technological as well as business method patents. As our semantic analysis reveals, RFID were successively introduced in their application fields between 1998 and 2008, starting with industrial applications, and then moving on to service applications. In future, technology managers should develop strategies based on the interaction between technological and business method patents, keeping in mind the early start and sequential development of different application fields.     

The Influence of CEOs' Visionary Innovation Leadership on the Performance of High‐Technology Ventures: The Mediating Roles of Connectivity and Knowledge Integration

Senior leaders play an essential role in facilitating knowledge creation processes and driving firms' innovation performance. However, little is known about the underlying relational mechanisms by which CEOs help build knowledge integration capability and drive firm innovation. We developed and tested a conceptual model about the ways in which CEOs shape a context conducive for knowledge creation processes and drive multiple innovation performance. A field, survey‐based, study among small‐ to medium‐sized technological ventures (SMVs) showed that CEO visionary innovation leadership (manifested by both vision for innovation and enactment of the vision through specific leadership behaviors) was positively related to a context of connectivity. Connectivity was related to firm knowledge integration capacity, which in turn resulted in enhanced firm innovation (new product quality, development speed, and product innovation). The findings also indicate direct links between CEO visionary innovation leadership and knowledge integration, and between connectivity and product innovation. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.     

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.     

The Interplay of Customer and Product Innovation Dynamics: An Exploratory Study

The challenges of successfully developing radical or really new products have received considerable attention from a variety of marketing, strategic, and organizational perspectives. Previous research has stressed the importance of a market‐driven customer orientation, the resolution of market and technological uncertainty, and organizational processes such as cross‐functional teams and organizational learning. However, several fundamental issues have not been addressed. From a customer's perspective, a more innovative product tends to have uncertain benefits and requires customers to learn new behaviors. Customer preferences can, therefore, change as product experience and learning increase. From a firm's perspective, it is unclear how to be customer‐oriented under such dynamic preferences, and product strategies using evolving technologies will tend to interact with how customers learn about an innovation. This research focuses on identifying unresolved issues about these customer and product innovation dynamics. A conceptual framework and series of propositions are presented that relate both changing technology and customer learning to a firm's strategic decisions in developing and launching really new products. The framework is based on in‐depth interviews with high‐tech product managers across several sectors, focusing on the business‐to‐business context. The propositions resulting from the framework highlight the need to consider relevant customer dynamics as integral to a firm's product innovation process. Successful innovation strategies and future research challenges are discussed, and applications to better understanding customer needs and theories of disruptive innovation are examined. Several key insights for innovation success hinge on a broad, downstream orientation to customer needs and product innovation dynamics. To be effective innovators, firms must know their customers' customers and competitors as well as or better than their immediate customers do. Market research must extend downstream for a comprehensive understanding of customer needs dynamics. In the context of disruptive innovation, new dimensions of customer needs may become more valuable based on perceived downstream customer trends. Firms may also innovate on secondary needs because mainstream customers do not always give firms the design freedom to radically innovate on primary features. Understanding customer commitments and how they develop under evolving needs can help firms focus resources on innovative efforts more likely to be accepted by customers.     

Reengineering of materials management system: A case study

A business process reengineering (BPR) project relating to the materials management function of a cement manufacturing plant is presented in this paper. The BPR project evolved out of an organisation development (OD) intervention initiative. Such an intervention aimed at improving value innovation capability of materials management professionals of a large cement manufacturing plant in India. The proposition here is that the value metrics relate to inside-in value innovations in order to deliver inside-out value to the customers in the face of fierce competition in Indian Cement industry. Materials of all types used in a cement plant constitute 60–70% of the total cost and hence the effective operations of procurement and inventory are the critical success factors for strategic value innovations and thereby competitiveness. The primary emphasis in this project was on learning and implementation, by creating an urgency for instilling responsible leadership and building organic partnership through knowledge networking.     

The Effects of Mainstream and Emerging Customer Orientations on Radical and Disruptive Innovations

The merits of being customer‐oriented for firm innovation have long been debated. Firms focused on their existing customers have been argued to be less innovative. This paper distinguishes between mainstream and emerging customer orientations and examines their effects on the introduction of disruptive and radical product innovations. Radical product innovations draw on a substantially new technology and could initially be targeted at a mainstream or an emerging market. In contrast, disruptive innovations are initially targeted at an emerging market, and may not involve the newest technology. This paper hypothesizes that mainstream customer orientation is negatively related to disruptive innovation and positively related to radical innovation, and that emerging customer orientation is positively related to disruptive innovation. To test these hypotheses, longitudinal and multiple informant data from senior executives in 128 SBUs of 19 Fortune 200 corporations are analyzed, with technology scanning and willingness to cannibalize as key control variables. The results support the hypotheses, providing evidence for contrasting effects of being oriented to mainstream customers and/or emerging customers on radical and disruptive innovations. Mainstream customer orientation has a positive impact on the introduction of radical innovations but a negative impact on disruptive innovation, while emerging customer orientation has a positive effect on disruptive innovation and is unrelated to radical innovations. Technology scanning is positively related to radical innovation but not to disruptive innovation, supporting the idea that disruptive innovation may not require new technology. In contrast, willingness to cannibalize is positively related to disruptive innovation but not to radical innovation, supporting the idea that radical innovation does not require cannibalization of existing investments. Additionally, mainstream customer orientation is found to have a near‐zero correlation with emerging customer orientation, indicating that the two can coexist and can be pursued simultaneously.     

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).     

Two Sides of the Same Coin: How Do Different Dimensions of Product Program Innovativeness Affect Customer Loyalty?

Conventional wisdom holds that innovativeness has essentially positive performance implications. However, empirical research reveals mixed findings regarding customer‐related responses to innovation, as distinct dimensions—such as product newness and meaningfulness—may generate responses in different manners. This study introduces a multidimensional conceptualization of innovativeness at the program level, thereby enlarging the customary perspective by considering both positive and negative customer responses to innovativeness. Drawing on information economics, this study suggests that product program meaningfulness fosters customer loyalty, whereas product program newness undermines customer loyalty. In addition, the study examines mechanisms that might buffer the negative newness–loyalty relationship and explores enablers of the positive meaningfulness–loyalty effect by considering a brand's association with innovativeness and customer integration. Empirical support for the proposed effects comes from a multi‐industry sample with 180 triadic cases from business‐to‐business companies, which includes assessments from marketing, and research and development managers as well as customers. Moderated regression analysis was applied to test the hypotheses. The results indicate a negative effect of product program newness on customer loyalty and a positive effect of product program meaningfulness. Further, a brand's close association with innovativeness reduces the negative effect of product newness, and integrating customers into the value‐creating process fosters the loyalty effect of product meaningfulness. This study offers a potential explanation for the ambiguity created by equivocal empirical results regarding customer responses to innovativeness. The study also shows that offering more innovations does not necessarily make customers loyal. Instead, managers should mitigate the negative effects of product program newness.     

A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review

A plethora of definitions for innovation types has resulted in an ambiguity in the way the terms ‘innovation’ and ‘innovativeness’ are operationalized and utilized in the new product development literature. The terms radical, really‐new, incremental and discontinuous are used ubiquitously to identify innovations. One must question, what is the difference between these different classifications? To date consistent definitions for these innovation types have not emerged from the new product research community. A review of the literature from the marketing, engineering, and new product development disciplines attempts to put some clarity and continuity to the use of these terms. This review shows that it is important to consider both a marketing and technological perspective as well as a macrolevel and microlevel perspective when identifying innovations. Additionally, it is shown when strict classifications from the extant literature are applied, a significant shortfall appears in empirical work directed toward radical and really new innovations. A method for classifying innovations is suggested so that practitioners and academics can talk with a common understanding of how a specific innovation type is identified and how the innovation process may be unique for that particular innovation type. A recommended list of measures based on extant literature is provided for future empirical research concerning technological innovations and innovativeness.

相似文献