Commercializing Technological Innovation: Learning from Failures in High‐Tech Markets*

Commercialization is known to be a critical stage of the technological innovation process, mainly because of the high risks and costs that it entails. Despite this, many scholars consider it to be often the least well managed phase of the entire innovation process, and there is ample empirical evidence corroborating this belief. In high‐tech markets, the difficulties encountered by firms in commercializing technological innovation are exacerbated by the volatility, interconnectedness, and proliferation of new technologies that characterize such markets. This is clearly evinced by the abundance of new high‐tech products that fail on the market chiefly due to poor commercialization. Yet there is no clear understanding, in management theory and practice, of how commercialization decisions influence the market failure of new high‐tech products. Drawing on research in innovation management, diffusion of innovation, and marketing, this article shows how commercialization decisions can influence consumer acceptance of a new high‐tech product in two major ways: (i) by affecting the extent to which the players in the innovation's adoption network support the new product; (ii) by affecting the post‐purchase attitude early adopters develop toward the innovation, and hence the type of word‐of‐mouth (positive or negative) they disseminate among later adopters. Lack of support from the adoption network is found to be an especially critical cause of failure for systemic innovations, while a negative post‐purchase attitude of early adopters is a more significant determinant of market failure for radical innovations. There follows a historical analysis of eight innovations launched on consumer high‐tech markets (Apple Newton, IBM PC‐Junior, Tom Tom GO, Sony Walkman, 3DO Interactive Multiplayer, Sony MiniDisc, Palm Pilot, and Nintendo NES), which illustrates how commercialization decisions (i.e., timing, targeting and positioning, inter‐firm relationships, product configuration, distribution, advertising, and pricing) can determine lack of support from the innovation's adoption network and a negative post‐purchase attitude of early adopters. The results of this work provide useful insights for improving the commercialization decisions of product and marketing managers operating in high‐technology markets, helping them avoid errors that are precursors of market failure. It is also hoped the article will inform further research aimed at identifying, theoretically and empirically, other possible causes of poor customer acceptance in high‐tech markets.     

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.     

The commercialization of user innovations: the development of the rodeo kayak industry

In this study, we analyze the commercialization process of user innovations in open communities. We have traced 16 cases of user innovators who have commercialized their own innovations or have been involved in the commercialization process to some extent. By developing and manufacturing new products, the user innovators in our sample created a fast-growing community. They used low-cost manufacturing techniques and were able to start a new industry before established manufacturers could enter the market. The transformation process from a user innovation community to a commercial and manufacturing community brought about a number of major changes. In this paper, we track those changes as: the motives for innovating, the community size and characteristics, the type of innovation, the type of assistance and the disclosure of information, the form of communication, and competition between innovating users.     

The dynamics of factors affecting the adoption of innovations

An abundance of IT innovations are constantly struggling for market acceptance. Various models have been proposed in the literature in order to aid understanding of the principles behind the adoption of IT innovations, but most of them implicitly assume that the factors explaining adoption decisions do not change over time. This study challenges that assumption and adds to the existing literature by investigating the dynamics of the factors influencing adoption. Our general proposition is that the driving factors in adopting innovations will change as the diffusion of the innovation in the market progresses. A large-scale empirical study was carried out among medium-sized companies in a variety of European countries and industries concerning the adoption of enterprise resource planning (ERP) software. The findings strongly indicate that the factors affecting late adoption of ERP differ significantly from the factors explaining early adoption. At early stages of the diffusion process adoption tends to be especially driven by a combination of internal strategic drives and attitudes of the firm together with external forces like industry competition and supplier activities. Later on, the mix of adoption stimulating factors seems to be focusing more on implementation issues such as the scalability of the system, the number of seats and the yearly available budget. The study leads to both new methodological insights and substantive conclusions that also have practical implications.     

Networks for the commercialization of innovations: A review of how divergent network actors contribute

Successful commercialization is of great importance to innovative firms, and the recent literature has increasingly acknowledged that networks make a contribution not only to research and development but also to commercialization. However, research on networks facilitating the commercialization of innovations is scattered across divergent disciplines. A single company is rarely capable of generating successful diffusion in the commercialization of an innovation; success often requires cooperation between individual actors and organizations, and support from stakeholders. Consequently, the network aspect of commercialization is crucial. The aim of this study is thus to integrate the knowledge on how current research and business has employed the network approach in commercialization, and how contributors external to the innovator firm can facilitate the commercialization of innovations. On the basis of an extensive metatheoretical literature review and a qualitative and quantitative content analysis on articles linking networks explicitly to commercialization, this study produces a conceptual synthesis on network actors' contribution potential to commercialization. The analysis identified divergent network approaches to commercialization and gathered extant knowledge on “commercialization networks” from the multidisciplinary literature of innovation management, marketing, management, technology, entrepreneurship, and other relevant disciplines. Networks for commercialization have been linked to divergent network approaches, such as industrial networks, social networks, strategic networks, and entrepreneurship networks. According to the findings, customers and users, distributors, complementaries, suppliers, investors, associations, public organizations, and policy makers and regulators can support commercialization by performing practical commercialization tasks, facilitating innovation adoption/diffusion and creating markets. We also identified four modes of contribution. In terms of methods, qualitative research dominates current examinations on the topic while longitudinal research and investigations from multiple network actors' perspectives are almost absent. The results also indicate a need to develop coherent conceptualizations and accumulate knowledge that would strengthen the theoretical basis of the research. A pivotal contribution of this article is that it is the first to generate an integrative framework and a research agenda on networks for commercialization — a theme that is emergent, multifaceted, and crucial to innovative companies.     

Negotiating innovation: product renewal as the outcome of a complex bargaining process

In this paper, it is argued that innovation can be the result of a repetitive, multi-actor negotiation process. We present the case of an environment-related product innovation in a large multinational company that emerged as the outcome of a complex interaction process in which numerous external and internal actors negotiated to safeguard their own interests. This negotiation perspective challenges conventional economic views of innovations, in which new products and processes are regarded as exogenous variables, the outcomes of deliberately planned research, or the combination of technology (pushing) and market (pulling) inducements. Instead, innovation may be a non-linear, unpredictable process that involves multiple actors with divergent interests and that leads to outcomes that are collectively acceptable but not necessarily (sub)optimal.     

The Role of Suppliers in Market Intelligence Gathering for Radical and Incremental Innovation*

Drawing on transaction cost economics theory, this study addresses the following research questions: (1) Does supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities have a greater impact on innovation success in predesign or commercialization activities? and (2) Does supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities have a greater impact on success in radical or incremental product innovation? Hypotheses are tested using both subjective and objective measures of success from a study of 205 incremental and 110 radical new product development projects. Results from the estimation of a two‐group path model suggest that this theoretical framework is useful in providing guidance as to when product developers should emphasize the gathering of market intelligence through suppliers. Consistent with conventional wisdom, the findings suggest that supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities are positively related to success in incremental innovations across predesign and commercialization activities. However, supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities is found to have no significant impact on market share and is negatively associated with perceived product performance in radical innovations in predesign tasks. Also, while there was no significant difference in market share for supplier involvement in market intelligence gathering activities between radical and incremental innovation in commercialization activities, supplier involvement in these activities did have a greater impact on perceived product performance in radical innovation than it did in incremental innovation. Although current practice suggests that teams allocate fewer resources to the gathering of market intelligence through their suppliers during predesign activities in incremental innovation projects compared with radical innovation projects, the findings in this study suggest that they should do the opposite. Shifting resources allocated for engaging suppliers in market information gathering activities in predesign activities from radical innovation projects to incremental innovation projects could increase the return on these investments. Alternatively, these resources currently allocated to the gathering of market intelligence through suppliers in predesign activities of radical innovation projects could also provide greater benefits if allocated to commercialization activities of radical innovation projects, where they have the greatest positive impact.     

Understanding commercialization of technological innovation: taking stock and moving forward

The commercialization of technological innovation, which is key to entrepreneurial success, represents a combination of several entrepreneurial activities. Building on research in management, strategy, entrepreneurship, and economics, this research summarizes 194 articles from 62 journals, categorizing them into six broad entrepreneurial activity themes: sources of innovations, types of innovation, market entry competence and feasibility, protection, development, and deployment. This review and synthesis suggest a framework of commercialization and an agenda for future research along with recommendations and guidance for future research. The proposed agenda provides topics and research questions for research, as well as related recommendations regarding the study and practice of the commercialization of innovation.     

Countervailing effects of value and risk perceptions in manufacturers' adoption of expensive,discontinuous innovations

Both value and risk perceptions are germane to industrial firms' adoption decisions involving discontinuous innovations. Yet a surprisingly limited number of studies examine how these two considerations jointly influence the innovation adoption phenomenon. We intend to fill this gap by studying the countervailing and context-dependent effects of value and risk perceptions on industrial firms' intention to adopt discontinuous innovations.A conceptual model is proposed and tested with data collected from influential decision makers in pharmaceutical manufacturers on their decision to adopt the modular facility technology, a costly, discontinuous facility construction innovation. The findings confirm the offsetting roles of value and risk in affecting adoption and reveal the moderating effects of external market pressure in that both value and risk assume greater roles in affecting adoption as external market pressure increases. Furthermore, our results show a positive effect of external market pressure on value, and negative effects of external market pressure and internal adoption readiness on risk.Our study contributes to the innovation diffusion and industrial marketing literatures by: (1) studying the joint and countervailing effects of value and risk perceptions on adoption decisions by manufacturers, (2) considering the contextual influences on industrial adopters' value and risk perceptions, and (3) gathering data from influential decision makers for a major capital investment decision.     

The Co-Diffusion of Complementary Innovations: Supermarket Scanners and UPC Symbols

Co-diffusion is the positive interaction between the demands for complementary innovations that have separate adoption tracks. This interaction is of growing importance to business strategy because a firm can facilitate the diffusion of an innovation by supporting and participating in the development and commercialization of related complementary technologies. This phenomenon is of special importance where connectivity among products is central to end-user value. Louis P. Bucklin and Sanjit Sengupta report results of their empirical investigation of the co-diffusion of laser scanners in supermarkets and Universal Product Code (UPC) symbols printed on the packages of stocked items. Their results show asymmetric two-way co-diffusion effects between these innovations. Co-diffusion effects are found to be stronger than innovation effects. Finally, the analysis reveals differential co-diffusion effects across major market segments.     

Design Inertia: Designing for Life‐Cycle Flexibility in Internet‐Based Services*

Managing innovation in rapidly moving environments, such as Internet‐based services, is a major challenge in theory and in practice. Most of the existing literature focuses on the development process as the main area in which innovation takes place. However, in environments where the pace of change of technology and market needs is extremely high, managing service innovations means not only being able to design a good service but also, more importantly, continuously redesigning and adapting the service in order to deal with frequent exogenous changes and opportunities. A high number of innovations therefore must be introduced throughout the entire life cycle of a service. This capability of introducing incremental and radical innovations during the service life cycle (i.e., to adapt a service to contextual changes and opportunities after it has been first released onto the market) at low costs and in the shortest possible time is what is defined here as service life‐cycle flexibility. This process of service adaptation and upgrading implies significant challenges that can be traced back to when a service is first conceived and designed. In fact, many decisions made during the first design process (i.e., the choice of a given database environment) involve a low reversibility rate and may reduce the possibility of taking advantage of future unpredictable opportunities, creating what is called inertia toward innovation. In other words, service life‐cycle flexibility largely depends on how a service has been first designed. This article analyzes two in‐depth case studies of Italian online newspapers and identifies five possible inertia factors that may influence service life‐cycle flexibility, namely (1) technological inertia; (2) internal organizational inertia; (3) external organizational inertia; (4) customer inertia toward changes in the service package; and (5) customer inertia toward changes in the service interaction design. These inertia factors are traced back to the service development process in order to suggest design practices that may increase the service life‐cycle flexibility.     

Marketing and Organisational Innovations in Entrepreneurial Innovation Processes and their Relation to Market Structure and Firm Characteristics

This paper analyses the influence of marketing and organisational changes on the innovation process. Using data from the German community innovation survey 2007, two topics are investigated: First, we analyse whether firm and market characteristics trigger certain innovation strategies. Second, this paper investigates whether marketing and organisational innovations (MO innovations) are complementary to product and process innovations (PP innovations) or whether they are substitutes. Our results suggest that firms choose broad innovation strategies, which combine MO and PP innovations, if they have large internal resources and intermediate market power. We also find that marketing innovations make product and process innovations more successful.     

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.     

The impact of innovation intensity,scope, and spillovers on sales growth in Chinese firms

We investigate the relationship between innovation and sales growth of firms in China. Innovation theories suggest firms create the technological knowledge needed to have market impact with their products and drive sales growth in different ways. These include: (1) through firms’ overall innovation intensity, (2) through decisions on innovation scope (depth vs. diversity), and (3) through knowledge spillovers from technological neighbors. Little research exists on how effective these approaches are for emerging market firms in pursuit of growth. To address this, we integrate and test the effects of these different knowledge creation mechanisms using data from Chinese firms over a five-year period. Findings show that innovation intensity and knowledge spillovers positively impact sales growth. We also develop and test a model capturing the non-linear impact of innovation scope. As predicted, we find a U-shaped relationship for depth of innovation and an inverted U-shaped relationship for diversity of innovation.     

Divergent and convergent logic of firms: Barriers and enablers for development and commercialization of innovations

This paper describes and discusses similarities and differences in the priorities, interests, and interactional goals of companies involved in the development and commercialization of innovation. We refer to such priorities, interests, and interactional goals as the logic of firms, and point to how differences among companies in these regards may enable or inhibit the development and commercialization of innovation. A case study in drug development, from a Taiwanese biopharmaceutical, illustrates two types of innovations: generic and novel drug development. Findings suggest how logic places focus on how certain actors may be more motivated toward innovation, but also on how the logic portrayed by actors can promote certain types of innovations (in this case generic ones), while inhibiting others (novel innovations). The paper concludes that companies need to have convergent logic (i.e. have the same priorities and similar or complementary interests and interaction goals) if an innovation process is to be successful. The focus on priorities, interests, and interactional goals of companies in innovation processes complements previous research that has primarily focused on the actual interaction, not what motivates it. The construct of shared logic nets as a means of analyzing convergent logic and gaps between different types of logic help to understand enablers and barriers to innovation.     

Organizing Continuous Product Development and Commercialization: The Collaborative Community of Firms Model

The increased importance of knowledge creation and use to firms' global competitiveness has spawned considerable experimentation with organizational designs for product development and commercialization over the last three decades. This paper discusses innovation‐related organizational design developments during this period, showing how firms have moved from stand‐alone organizations to multifirm network organizations to community‐based organizational designs. The collaborative community of firms model, the most recent organizational design in this evolutionary process, is described in detail. Blade.org, a purposefully designed collaborative community of firms dedicated to the continuous development and commercialization of blade servers, a computer technology with large but unforeseeable market potential, is used as an illustrative case. Blade.org's organizational design combines a community “commons” for the collective development and sharing of knowledge among member firms with explicit institutional mechanisms for the support of direct intermember collaboration. These design elements are used to overcome the challenges associated with (1) concurrent technological and market experimentation and (2) the dynamic coordination of a complex emergent system of hardware, software, and services provided by otherwise independent firms. To date, Blade.org has developed more than 60 new products, providing strong evidence of the innovation prowess of the collaborative community of firms organizational model. Based on an analysis of the evolution of organizational designs and the case of Blade.org, implications for innovation management theory and practice are derived.     

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.     

Exploring How Peer Communities Enable Lead User Innovations to Become Standard Equipment in the Industry: Community Pull Effects

Literature on new product development indicates that on average around 40% of new products fail across different industries (e.g., Crawford, 1977 ; Crawford and Di Benedetto, 2008 ). Out of those that survive only few become widely accepted standard equipment in the industry (Utterback, 1996 ). Literature on entrepreneurship (e.g., Baron and Shane, 2008 ) and on innovation (e.g., Christensen, 1997 ) shows that such innovations often originate outside the boundaries of established firms. However, it is difficult to understand and analyze the exact source of such innovations and the entrepreneurial processes by which they are developed. It is therefore the aim of this study to shed light on how innovations become widely accepted by large segments of the market and specifically which demand‐side forces are at work. An approach suitable for pursuing this objective is to focus on those individuals who are on the leading edge with respect to an important market trend (lead users) and their respective peer communities. As little knowledge is available, an explorative case study design is applied, working with cases from two different industries, specifically the medical equipment and sporting equipment industry. A longitudinal research design is used, extracting data from multiple respondents and various other sources such as reports, publications, databases, or community web pages. The research framework takes a process perspective by following the entrepreneurial processes from invention to commercialization and diffusion. In this process, micro‐level variables at the individual and group level are analyzed as well as the barriers to be overcome by the individual innovator and the community. The findings show that communities play a central and active role in the entrepreneurial process. Community members provide valuable feedback on the overall potential of the lead users' ideas, participate by making concrete development contributions, acting as testers of the new products, and finally helping to diffuse the innovations inside and outside the community. We identify two pull effects on the part of the community: first, community members demand and facilitate the development of prototypes; and second, community members help to cross the chasm between first adopters and the early majority. This paper has various implications for entrepreneurship and innovation research. For entrepreneurship, this article points out peer communities as a specific kind of social network that plays a crucial role in entrepreneurial processes. For innovation research, this article emphasizes the interaction between lead users and their peer communities in the process of developing the next dominant product design.     

How Do Transformational Leaders Promote Exploratory and Exploitative Innovation? Examining the Black Box through MASEM

Understanding how firms can promote exploratory and exploitative innovations is of high interest for both scholars and practitioners. Although a substantial body of research has emphasized that top management's transformational leadership is crucial to innovation, the mechanisms through which strategic leaders influence these distinct types of innovations remain unclear. Building on upper echelon and social learning theory, this study develops and empirically examines a model that investigates the mediating roles of three distinct strategic orientations (market, learning, and entrepreneurial orientation) on the relationship between transformational leadership and exploratory and exploitative innovation. Using meta‐analytic methods combined with structural equation modeling, this study integrates findings from separate research streams, covering over 15 years of research, and using a sample of 215 effect sizes from 75 studies. The results from the partial mediation model reveal that transformational leaders play a key role in creating these specific strategic orientations which, in turn, support different innovation outcomes. Specifically, the findings indicate that transformational leaders promote exploitative innovations predominantly by building a market orientation, whereas they foster exploratory innovations by stimulating an entrepreneurial and a learning orientation. Hence, this study extends upper echelon research by uncovering the different mechanisms through which transformational leaders promote exploratory and exploitative innovations as it theoretically identifies and empirically validates the unique mediating roles of three specific strategic orientations. The results thus provide valuable insights for the challenging management of exploratory and exploitative innovations, as they provide a “guiding map” which reveals how transformational leaders from the top may use specific orientations to foster these distinct types of innovations.     

The Role of Future‐Market Focus in the Early Stages of NPD across Varying Levels of Innovativeness

The concept of future‐market focus (FMF) arose out of the debate about firm size and incumbency in the face of radical or disruptive innovations, and has been demonstrated to have a positive correlation with radical innovation (RI) success. This study examines the relationship between FMF and the processes used in the early stages of NPD for four types of innovation projects: incremental innovations, technological breakthroughs, market breakthroughs, and radical innovations. We found that the future‐market focus of a project team can influence the early stage processes used in a new product innovation project, and does so differentially across levels of innovativeness. In particular, the concept generation process, understanding of market needs, and screening decision criteria are different for low‐ versus high‐FMF projects and there are differences based on the level of innovation. In addition, we found that radical innovation projects rated low in FMF are markedly different than the radical innovation projects described in prior studies.