Evolution of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association1

This article summarizes the 45‐year history of the American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association (AREUEA). It describes how AREUEA was created in the mid‐1960s by a few academics interested in promoting real estate research. It tracks the Association's growth into a highly respected international association of real estate academics and researchers employed by industry and governments. The article also examines the activities of its members: officers elected, awards presented, conferences organized and scholars' contributions to its main academic publication—Real Estate Economics. The article identifies the most prolific contributors to the Journal (located both in the United States and internationally) and the impact that the Journal's publications have had on real estate research. Finally, we describe how real estate research interests have changed over time.     

Exploring the Appeal of Product Design: A Grounded,Value‐Based Model of Key Design Elements and Relationships*

Product design is increasingly being recognized as an important source of sustainable competitive advantage. Until recently, the domain of design has been loosely categorized as “form and function” issues. However, as this paper will explore, product design deals with a much richer range of issues, many of which have not been considered in the marketing literature. To explore the domain and elements of design, the paper begins with two major goals: (1) to elicit the key dimensions of design and to develop an enriched language for the understanding and study of design; and (2) to integrate the design dimensions within a broader model that ties initial design goals to eventual psychological and behavioral responses from consumers. To achieve these ends, grounded theory development is used by conducting an extensive literature review, in‐depth interviews, and an interactive object elicitation technique. Drawing from this rich source of qualitative information as well as diverse literature fields, a framework is proposed for the creation of design value in consumer products. This framework not only explores the domain of design but also highlights the important elements of design that go well beyond the clichéd form and function issues. The resulting model reflects specific marketplace and organizational constraints that may help or impede the conversion of designer goals to so‐called design levers. These levers are used to convey three types of values to consumers: rational, kinesthetic, and emotional. The framework then explains how and when these different values may be perceived by the consumer. Within this framework, testable research propositions and specific directions for future design‐based research are also offered. Beyond its potential to spur marketing and new product development (NPD) management thought, the framework offered here represents a significant contribution to the field of design, which has historically been represented as a highly fragmented body of knowledge. Formalizing this framework should help overcome perhaps the largest obstacle to date to marketing‐related and NPD‐related research in this area—the lack of a detailed and consistent nomological view of the scope of design dimensions including testable linkages. Design has become an important tool that can be used by managers to develop dominant brands with lasting advantages. This research lends the NPD manager and the marketing manager better insights in into how this increasingly popular focus can be used to influence consumer behavior and firm success. “Design may be our top unexploited competitive edge.” Tom Peters, 2004 (cover review of Norman, 2004 ) “We don't have a good language to talk about [design]. In most people's vocabularies, design means veneer.… But to me, nothing could be further from the meaning of design. Design is the fundamental soul of a man‐made creation.” Steve Jobs, Apple Computers     

Foreign‐born academic scientists: entrepreneurial academics or academic entrepreneurs?

Although foreign‐born scholars make up a significant portion of the US professoriate, little is known about how their ‘foreign‐born’ identity directly or indirectly affects their entrepreneurial prowess. This article integrates role identity theory with theoretical arguments from social network and cultural proximity theories to examine whether foreign‐born academic scientists can better be characterized as entrepreneurial academics (strong government grant productivity) or academic entrepreneurs (strong involvement in the creation and commercialization of university‐invented technologies). Our analysis indicates that foreign‐born academic scientists seem more successful in attracting research resources, but are less successful in exploiting their inventions through entrepreneurial activities. They can therefore be best described as entrepreneurial academics. These findings may partially explain the tepid performance of many research‐intensive universities in terms of technology transfer and commercialization. We discuss the policy implications of our findings and provide guidance for academic entrepreneurs.     

Research quality: What it is,and how to achieve it

Researchers are under constant pressure to publish high-quality research. What, however, constitutes high-quality research? Most universities use accepted lists of top-tier journals, citation counts, or other metrics to assess the value of research contributions. We first explore the metrics by which research contributions are evaluated. These metrics provide at least some indication of the impact and value of an academic's stream of research.We then consider the issue of value beyond the commonly accepted metrics of article counts and citations. Should high-quality research create value for students and, especially in the case of business academics, for managers and practitioners? If so, rather than focusing exclusively on theoretical contributions, researchers should demonstrate the value-in-use of the research stream to the broader community. We present a set of conditions to support a research stream that delivers value-in-use to students and practitioners.We then turn to whether high-quality research implies finding solutions to societal challenges and problems. This would require a rethinking of the traditional views on the university's relationship with society at large. We explore issues of research concerning its contribution to society. We conclude by distilling these issues into several pieces of advice to new and mid-career academics regarding strategies and challenges in developing high-quality research.     

Follow the Leader or the Pack? Regulatory Focus and Academic Entrepreneurial Intentions

Drawing on the academic entrepreneurship and regulatory focus theory literature, and applying a multilevel perspective, this paper examines why university academics intend to engage in formal (spin‐off or start‐up companies and licensing university research) or informal (collaborative research, contract research, continuous professional development, and contract consulting) commercialization activities and the role local contextual factors, in particular leaders and work‐group colleagues (peers), play in their commercialization choices. Based on a survey of 395 science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) academics working in 14 Scottish universities, the research findings suggest that an individual's chronic regulatory focus has a direct effect on their formal and informal commercialization intent. The results reveal that the stronger an individual's chronic promotion focus the stronger their formal and informal commercialization intentions and a stronger individual chronic prevention focus leads to weaker intentions to engage in informal commercialization. In addition, when contextual interaction effects are considered, leaders and workplace colleagues have different influences on commercialization intent. On the one hand, promotion‐focused leaders can strengthen and prevention‐focused leaders can under certain circumstances weaken a promotion‐focused academic's formal commercialization intent. On the other hand, the level of workplace colleague engagement, acting as a reference point, strengthens not only promotion‐focused academics’ intent to engage in formal commercialization activities, but also prevention‐focused academics’ corresponding informal commercialization intent. As such, universities should consider the appointment of leaders who are strong role models and have a track record in formal and/or informal commercialization activities and also consider the importance workplace colleagues have on moderating an academic's intention to engage in different forms of commercialization activities.     

Research Opportunities Related to Consumer Response to Product Design*

This essay identifies five research opportunities that concern consumer response to product design. The first opportunity involves the need for more research on the interaction between form and function in consumer product evaluations. To this end, more knowledge about how product appearance characteristics influence consumer evaluation of both product form and function, and how this differs between countries and in time, is needed. The second research opportunity concerns the influence of consumer input in the front end of new product development on product success. Although the positive effect of market information use on product success is known, more actionable insight into which consumer information or input is beneficial in which circumstances is largely missing. The third opportunity for research concerns how to include subjective product attributes in concept testing. Getting valid feedback from consumers, which includes functional as well as emotional and experiential aspects, can improve proficiency in the early stages of product development. In this essay, several ways of approaching this research endeavor are highlighted. Next to enhancing market receipt and the assessment of product design, two topics that concern consumer response to product design from a more managerial viewpoint are identified. The first of these is strategic management of product styling. The importance and opportunities of visual design for brand management has gained more attention in the literature; different strategies and the cases in which they are beneficial are issues for further research. And finally, the design of product service systems (PSSs) provides opportunities for future research. Here, engendering perceptual unity between products and services and an explicit managing of meanings and feelings that PSSs should communicate are issues at play.     

Perspective: New Service Development: How the Field Developed,Its Current Status and Recommendations for Moving the Field Forward

New service development (NSD) is a growing innovation discipline. Despite the growth of articles about NSD, several authors have criticized the lack of attention paid to NSD, compared with new product development (NPD), and the lack of consensus across NSD findings. At the same time, others have proclaimed that NSD is a sophisticated, mature field of research. This paper tries to resolve these issues by analyzing 230 empirical articles on NSD, published over a period of 30 years. It investigates the content of NSD research articles, the authors contributing to the field, and the research methodologies employed. It finds that, despite its growing popularity, the field has not moved forward substantively. NSD is a subject specialty but lacks an “invisible college” of researchers addressing the topic. This has resulted in a body of research that fails to provide managers with consistent answers to basic questions about how to most effectively manage NSD processes. One of the main causes for the lack of coherence in the knowledge on this topic may stem from the fact that, rather than initially approaching research in the domain without ingoing bias and using grounded theory approaches to create initial understanding, many of the early researchers applied the concepts, frameworks, and methods used to understand NPD to the NSD domain. To correct this problem, it is proposed that the field of NSD needs to move forward in a significantly different manner. This paper provides several recommendations for attracting more academics to the field, elevating the visibility and status of NSD as a research domain, and also presents a research agenda that may help reorient future research in this area so that a more complete and coherent body of knowledge is generated that both advances the field and helps practitioners manage NSD more effectively and efficiently.     

Perspectives on social media ant its use by key account managers

Social media has recently received increased attention from practitioners and academics. Although social media helps build relationships, no academic study to date has investigated the use of social media by key account managers, although building and developing relationships with key customers are at the core of these managers' expertise. This research contributes to building the first level of understanding of how key account managers use social media and the major issues. To address this topic, we perform a qualitative research study using the grounded theory methodology. We present a model of key account managers' use of social media derived from our empirical data and relate it to a key customer engagement model.     

Consequences of New Product Development Speed: A Meta‐Analysis

Five meta‐analyses previously have been published on the topic of new product development involving the concept of new product development speed. Three of these studies have investigated antecedents to new product development success, of which just one was new product development speed. The other two studies used new product development speed as the dependent variable, and analyzed antecedents to achieving speed. This article extends previous empirical generalizations in this domain by using a meta‐analytic methodology to understand the link between new product development speed and new product success at a more granular level. Specifically, it considers the relationship with different dimensions of success as measured overall or compositely, operationally (i.e., the process measures of decreasing development costs and proficiently managing market entry timing and the product measures of technical product performance and product competitive advantage), and relative to external success outcomes (i.e., customer based and financial success). While the results indicate that, in general, new product development speed is associated with improving success outcomes, those relationships may diminish or even disappear depending upon a number of methodological design decisions and research contexts. A subsequent meta‐analysis of the antecedents of development speed provides a more holistic picture of development speed. These results are broadly consistent with those produced by another recent meta‐analytic investigation of the issue. Together, these findings have important implications for academics pursuing further research in this domain, as well as for managers considering implementing a program to increase new product development speed.     

Developing Sustainable New Products in the Textile and Upholstered Furniture Industries: Role of External Integrative Capabilities

Environmental sustainability has become one of the key issues for strategy, marketing, and innovation. In particular, significant attention is being paid by companies, customers, media, and regulators to development and consumption of green products. It is argued that through the efficient use of resources, low carbon impacts, and risks to the environment, green products can be essential to help society toward the environmental sustainability targets. The number of green product introductions is rapidly increasing, as demonstrated by the growing number of companies obtaining eco‐labels or third party certifications for their environmentally friendly products. Hundreds of companies representing most of the industries, such as Intel, SC Johnson, Clorox, Wal‐Mart, and Hewlett–Packard, have recently introduced new green products, underlining the need to develop products that create both economic and environmental values for the firm and customers. A review of the literature shows that academic research on green product development has grown in interest. However, to date, only a few empirical studies have addressed the challenge of integrating environmental issues into new product development (NPD). Previous empirical works have mainly focused on a set of activities for the green product development process at the project level. After years of paying no or marginal attention to environmental sustainability issues, most of the companies now generally realize that it would require knowledge and competencies to develop green products on a regular basis. These knowledge and competencies can be varied, such as R&D, environmental know‐how, clean technology/manufacturing process, building knowledge on measuring environmental performance of products, etc., that may be developed internally or can be integrated through external networks. Adopting a resource‐based view of the firm, this article aims at (1) investigating the role of capabilities useful for companies to integrate knowledge and competencies from outside of the firm on green product development in terms of both manufacturing process and product design and (2) understanding whether green product development opens new product, market, and technology opportunities, as well as leads to better financial performance of NPD programs. To this end, a survey was conducted in two Italian manufacturing industries in which environmental issues are becoming increasingly important, namely textiles and upholstered furniture. A questionnaire was sent to 700 firms, and 102 useable questionnaires were returned. Results show that (1) companies engage in developing external integrative capabilities through the creation of collaborative networks with actors along the supply chain, the acquisition of technical know‐how, and the creation of external knowledge links with actors outside the supply chain; (2) external knowledge links play a key role in the integration of environmental sustainability issues into the manufacturing process, whereas capabilities such as the acquisition of technical know‐how and the creation of collaborative networks prove to be more important for integrating environmental issues into product design; and (3) the integration of environmental sustainability issues into NPD programs in terms of product design leads to the creation of new opportunities for firms, such as opening new markets, technologies, and product arenas, though not necessarily leading to improved financial performance of the NPD programs.     

The implicit use of business concepts in the UK Research Assessment Exercise

Research assessment exercises covering universities in the United Kingdom were established to produce quality ratings as a basis for allocating much of the research funding from central government. They represent some of the largest research management exercises ever undertaken. Amongst other aspects of university performance, the publications of all 'research active' UK academics are evaluated. This paper describes the way in which quality was assessed and funds were allocated as a result of the 1992, 1996 and 2001 exercises. It looks at how the exercises might continue to evolve and the value of a further exercise.
The strategies adopted by universities to maximise their ratings and their income are also considered. Universities have improved their research performance and their reporting methods in response to changes in the criteria and weightings used in the exercise. In parallel the HEFC (Higher Education Funding Council) has changed the ways in which funds have been distributed once the level of research performance has been determined.
The exercises have received much criticism as well as an acceptance that they have changed the culture of academic research. This paper considers the parallel evolution of trends in the management of R&D in business with trends in the management of university research via these exercises. There are underlying assumptions that seem to influence the transfer of policy design principles and management lessons between the two sectors.     

Global Outsourcing Relationships and Innovation: A Conceptual Framework and Research Propositions

Increasing globalization and the rapid growth of information technologies, including the Internet, have resulted in drastic changes in international activities of companies. Once limited to manufactured goods, currently, global outsourcing encompasses a wide variety of knowledge‐based services, such as accounting, financial services, taxation, customer service, information technology, engineering drawings, human resources, research and development (R&D), data processing, and sales. The domain of outsourcing knowledge‐based services is the focus of this paper. Moving beyond the inevitability of global outsourcing, this research takes the perspective of the outsourcer and focuses on managing its transition to providers in the context of innovation. In addition to delivering projected cost benefits to outsourcers, effective transition management can facilitate the generation of innovations. This research attempts to extend the current academic research on global outsourcing in three ways: (1) It offers a framework for understanding the transition process in outsourcing and its relationship to innovation; (2) it takes a broader perspective of outsourcing, including globalization, knowledge‐based services, and core activities of the firm; and (3) using a parsimonious set of theoretical concepts based on control theory, it develops several research propositions to clarify the linkages between variables. Based on our theorizing, outsourcing top management should ask two questions when planning outsourcing of knowledge‐based services to generate innovations in a globalized world. These two questions are: (1) How close is the task to our core competence? And (2) how much tacit knowledge is involved in doing the outsourced task? Next, managers must identify global providers and then spend considerable thought in operational execution of the transition of the task for that is the only time that both complete teams will work together. For tasks that are close to core competence, rigid‐explicit behavioral controls should be put in place; however, for tasks that have high tacit knowledge content, high norms‐based relational control would be more effective. These different types of controls would lead to different innovation outcomes. Rigid‐explicit behavioral controls would produce incremental innovation while relational norms‐based controls would encourage radical innovation.     

Design,Meanings, and Radical Innovation: A Metamodel and a Research Agenda*

Recent studies on design management have helped us to better comprehend how companies can apply design to get closer to users and to better understand their needs; this is an approach usually referred to as user‐centered design. Yet analysis of design‐intensive manufacturers such as Alessi, Artemide, and other leading Italian firms shows that their innovation process hardly starts from a close observation of user needs and requirements. Rather, they follow a different strategy called design‐driven innovation in this paper. This strategy aims at radically change the emotional and symbolic content of products (i.e., their meanings and languages) through a deep understanding of broader changes in society, culture, and technology. Rather than being pulled by user requirements, design‐driven innovation is pushed by a firm's vision about possible new product meanings and languages that could diffuse in society. Design‐driven innovation, which plays such a crucial role in the innovation strategy of design intensive firms, has still remained largely unexplored. This paper aims at providing a possible direction to fill this empty spot in innovation management literature. In particular, first it proposes a metamodel for investigating design‐driven innovation in which a manufacturer's ability to understand, anticipate, and influence emergence of new product meanings is built by relying on external interpreters (e.g., designers, firms in other industries, suppliers, schools, artists, the media) that share its same problem: to understand the evolution of sociocultural models and to propose new visions and meanings. Managing design‐driven innovation therefore implies managing the interaction with these interpreters to access, share, and internalize knowledge on product languages and to influence shifts in sociocultural models. Second, the paper proposes a possible direction to scientifically investigate the management of this networked and collective research process. In particular, it shows that the process of creating breakthrough innovations of meanings partially mirrors the process of creating breakthrough technological innovations. Studies of design‐driven innovation may therefore benefit significantly from the existing body of theories in the field of technology management. The analysis of the analogies between these two types of radical innovations (i.e., meanings and technologies) allows a research agenda to be set for exploration of design‐driven innovation, a relevant as well as underinvestigated phenomenon.     

Issues for Management Thought and Research

One of the tenets of the editors of The Journal of Product Innovation Management is the principle, probably first enunciated by social scientist Kurt Lewin, that there is nothing more practical than a good theory. That principle is one that draws together academics and practicing managers to the journal's task of advancing the management of product innovation. It is a principle that says to academics that their theories must meet the test of utility, and to managers that it can be useful to develop a theoretical perspective.
Questions of practice and theory emerged in the first two issues of the journal when members of the Editorial Board presented a series of viewpoints on the issues they thought would be significant for the future of product innovation management. These were viewpoints that questioned our current practices and suggested     

A Bibliometric Review of Open Innovation: Setting a Research Agenda

Through an objective, systematic, and comprehensive review of the literature on open innovation (OI), this article identifies gaps in existing research, and provides recommendations on how hitherto unused or underused organizational, management, and marketing theories can be applied to advance the field. This study adopts a novel approach by combining two complementary bibliometric methods of co‐citation analysis and text mining of 321 journal articles on OI that enables a robust empirical analysis of the intellectual streams and key concepts underpinning OI. Results reveal that researchers do not sufficiently draw on theoretical perspectives external to the field to examine multiple facets of OI. Research also seems confined to innovation‐specific journals with its focus restricted to a select few OI issues, thereby exerting limited influence on the wider business community. This study reveals three distinct areas within OI research: (1) firm‐centric aspects of OI, (2) management of OI networks, and (3) role of users and communities in OI. Thus far, studies have predominantly investigated the firm‐centric aspects of OI, with a particular focus on the role of knowledge, technology, and R&D from the innovating firm's perspective, while the other two areas remain relatively under‐researched. Further gaps in the literature emerge that present avenues for future research, namely to: (1) develop a more comprehensive understanding of OI by including diverse perspectives (users, networks, and communities), (2) direct increased attention to OI strategy formulation and implementation, and (3) enhance focus on customer co‐creation and conceptualize “open service innovation.” Marketing (e.g., service‐dominant logic), organizational behavior (e.g., communities of practice), and management (e.g., dynamic capabilities) offer suitable theoretical lenses and/or concepts to address these gaps.     

Product Design Innovation and Customer Value: Cross‐Cultural Research in the United States and Korea

Innovation is one of the key drivers of success that a firm must utilize to develop a competitive advantage. The ability to innovate is especially important for a firm's survival in dynamic, changing environments. Customer demands are constantly changing, and more purchases are made when a firm's product design incorporates what customers perceive as cutting‐edge innovations. Satisfying customer demands is a distinct challenge for product designers because firms must develop a clear understanding of what aspects of design the customer wants. Although the importance of design has increased, very little research has been done to explain the relationship between product innovation and product design. Studies indicate that design innovation may create greater customer value through improvements in design value. Previous research has been limited and has not provided a clear concept of design innovation or defined the relationship between design innovation and marketing competencies. This paper seeks to offer a conceptual definition of design innovation, and to define the link between design innovation and marketing competencies. This paper utilizes cross‐cultural research to discover how these concepts differ due to cultural differences between the United States and Korea. This research contributes substantially to our understanding of the relationship between design innovation and customer value.     

Perceptions of Industrial Design: The “Means” and the “Ends”

It is widely accepted that industrial design can play an important role in the development of innovative products, but integrating design‐thinking into new product development (NPD) is a challenge. This is because industrial designers have very different perspectives and goals than the other members of the NPD team, and this can lead to tensions. It has been postulated that the communications between NPD managers and industrial designers are made more difficult because each group uses very different language. This research made the first empirical investigation of the language used by designers and managers in describing “good” and “poor” industrial design. In‐depth interviews were conducted with a sample of 19 managers and industrial designers at five leading companies. Multiple sources of data were utilized, including the repertory grid technique to elicit the key attributes of design, from the perspective of managers and designers. Using a robust, systematic coding approach to maximize the validity and reliability of qualitative data analysis, it was established that managers and industrial designers do not use a completely different vocabulary as previously supposed. Rather, it was found that managers and industrial designers use some common terms augmented by additional terms that are specific to each group: managers are commercially orientated in the “ends” they want to achieve and designers perceive more antecedents (“means”) necessary to achieve their “ends”—iconic design. This research led to a grounded conceptual model of the role of design, as perceived by managers and industrial designers. The implications of the results achieved are wide: they indicate how managers and designers can interact more productively during NPD; they highlight the need for more research on the language of designers and managers; and they point to issues that need to be covered in the education of industrial designers. Finally, this work suggests how managers and designers can engage in a more fruitful dialogue that will help to make NPD more productive.     

How to collaborate really well with practitioners

We offer a meta-perspective on the collaboration between university academics and business practitioners. While academics often intuitively and implicitly take an inside perspective, namely a university perspective, in discussing collaborative research and the why, how, and what in collaborating with practitioners, we bring to the fore an outside perspective, namely a business perspective, on the same collaboration, which then typically is termed collaborative innovation. Doing this gives us the opportunity to mirror the two perspectives against each other and to discuss the differences, difficulties, and learning opportunities in the relationship between universities and businesses. Ultimately, we offer a discussion of how academics can be inspired to engage better with practitioners.     

Radical Design and Technology Epiphanies: A New Focus for Research on Design Management

The past decade has ushered in a growth of interest on design, both among scholars and practitioners. The consequence has been the development of a wealth of new theories on design, innovation, and design management. After a decade of studies, we have developed significant understanding about how firms may better analyze customer needs through user‐centered design, how they can generate better ideas through brainstorming methods and multidisciplinary teams, how consumers value the form of products. Yet, as often happens in research, many studies have focused on the most visible and measurable forms of design (those connected to the clear processes and methods of user‐centered design). The consequence is that, apart from a few exceptions, the focus of theory development has been on incremental innovation enabled by design: better user interface, improvements, differentiation, nice ideas and features that get rapidly imitated and obsolete. Scholars have often neglected some of the most intriguing forms of design, i.e., when design brings a radical perspective, when it contributes to the redefinition of an industry, and the creation of a new paradigm. In this short note I hope to set the stage for this new frontier of research in design management. In particular I propose two fields of investigation: the role of design to radically innovate the meaning of products and services, and the interaction of radical design with radical technologies, which I call technology epiphanies, i.e., the identification of the most powerful meaning enabled by a breakthrough technology.     

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.