Learning by supplying

Outsourcing in many industries has advanced beyond simple component supply to encompass manufacturing of entire products, often by suppliers in emerging economies. Understanding the evolving role and capabilities of suppliers in global supply chains is thus a pressing strategic issue for suppliers and customers alike. We analyze a novel panel dataset of supply relationships in the mobile telecommunications industry to answer the following questions: What factors contribute to a supplier's ability to build technological and market capabilities? Does it matter to whom the firm supplies? Is involvement in product design important, or is manufacturing the key to learning? Do the same types of relationships that support technological innovation also facilitate successful introduction of own‐brand products, or does this require a different “locus” of learning? Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Supplier traits for better customer firm innovation performance

Previous research on embedded ties with suppliers in an innovation context has ignored the need for customer firms to assess and select suppliers on the basis of market orientation strategies and relationship marketing attributes. To address this void, this study investigates the effects of suppliers' downstream customer orientation and supplier-customer homophily (i.e., similarity of the supplier and the customer) on the customers' innovation performance. Data pertaining to new product development projects with contributions from supplier firms was collected on both sides of the supplier-customer dyad. The analysis shows that downstream customer orientation and supplier-customer homophily have a significant impact on the customer firms' new product efficiency (i.e., project cost and project speed) and new product effectiveness (i.e., innovativeness), which in turn positively influence new product performance in terms of profitability, market share, and growth.     

Effects of Supplier and Customer Integration on Product Innovation and Performance: Empirical Evidence in Hong Kong Manufacturers

While the beneficial impacts of supplier and customer integration are generally acknowledged, very few empirical research studies have examined how an organization can achieve better product performance through product innovation enhanced by such integration. This paper thus examines the impact of key supplier and customer integration processes (i.e., information sharing and product codevelopment with supplier and customer, respectively) on product innovation as well as their impact on product performance. It contributes to existing literature by asking how such integration activities affect product innovation and performance in both direct and indirect ways. After surveying 251 manufacturers in Hong Kong, this study tested the relationships among information sharing, product codevelopment, product innovativeness, and performance with three control variables (i.e., company size, type of industry, and market certainty). Structural equation modeling with correlation and t‐tests was used to test the hypothesized research model. The findings indicate a direct, positive relationship between supplier and customer integration and product performance. In particular, this study verifies that sharing information with suppliers and product codevelopment with customers directly improves product performance. In addition, this study empirically examines the indirect effects of supplier and customer integration processes on product performance, mediated by innovation. This has seldom been attempted in previous research. The empirical findings show that product codevelopment with suppliers improves performance, mediated by innovation. However, the sampled firms cannot improve their product innovation by sharing information with their current customers and suppliers as well as codeveloping new products with the customers. If the adoption of supplier and customer integration is not cost free, the findings of this study may suggest firms work on particular supplier and customer integration processes (i.e., product codevelopment with suppliers) to improve their product innovation. The study also suggests that companies codevelop new products only with new customers and lead users instead of current ones for product innovation. For managers, this study has demonstrated that both information sharing and product codevelopment affect performance directly and indirectly. Managers should put more emphasis on these key processes, especially when linked with product innovation. Managers should consider involving their suppliers and customers in the early stages of design. Information sharing with suppliers is also important in product development. As suggested by this study, extensive effort on supplier and customer integration should be made to directly augment current product performance and product innovation at the same time.     

Assessing customer orientation in the context of buyer/supplier relationships using judgmental modelling

Retail buying is a particular form of industrial buying, one characterised by buying for the purposes of reselling to the ultimate customer, rather than for use. Retail buyers have a complex role. They are responsible for meeting the requirements of their target customers and they also have to manage relationships with suppliers in order to obtain the best terms and conditions.Modern retailing is also characterised by a high degree of concentration and centralisation of the buying function. Buyers can operate autonomously or within a buying group. Those selling or marketing to commercial buyers need to understand the needs of the buyer in order to be effective. They need to understand the buyers' businesses and how to develop relationships with them.A mediator in the development of a customer relationship is customer orientation. A customer orientation is a central factor in being market orientated, but despite the importance of customer and market orientation there has been little research into how well suppliers understand their customers in a commercial context.In the research reported here retail buyers of textile products were personally interviewed with the aid of decision analysis software to identify the significance of criteria they use in a defined buying situation. The same methodology was repeated with suppliers to identify how well suppliers understood the decision making of buyers in their market. The decision-making process was modelled using a compensatory approach, assuming six decision criteria in a choice of sourcing options. These criteria were partly selected from a pilot conducted with eight retailers in the UK and partly from the literature review and in particular the works of Nilsson and Høst [Nilsson J, Høst V. Reseller assortment decision criteria. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 1987] and Weber et al. [Weber CA, Current JR, Benton WC. Vendor selection criteria and methods. Eur J Oper Res 1991;50(1):2-18].The study found that while buyers were able to understand the relative importance of decision-making criteria adequately, they underestimated the importance of certain criteria. The results demonstrate the potential for judgmental modelling in the appraisal of customer orientation.     

Customer Involvement in New Service Development: An Examination of Antecedents and Outcomes*

Customer involvement has been recognized as an important factor for successful service development. Despite its acknowledged importance, a review of the literature suggests that there is little empirical evidence about the effectiveness and outcomes of interacting with customers while developing new services. Similarly, the extant literature shows mixed views about the effect of technological uncertainty on customer involvement and the effectiveness of customer involvement at different stages of the new service development process. Against this backdrop, the present study has three objectives: (1) to investigate the effects of customer involvement on operational dimensions (i.e., innovation speed and technical quality) and market dimensions (i.e., competitive superiority and sales performance) of new service performance; (2) to examine the effect of technological novelty and technological turbulence on customer involvement; and (3) to explore the moderating effect of the stage of the development process on the relationships among technological novelty, technological turbulence and customer involvement, and customer involvement and new service performance. A total of 807 firms with 75 or more employees in a varied set of industries were selected from the Dun & Bradstreet's 2004 listing of Spanish service firms. A questionnaire was mailed to the person in charge of new service development at each company. A total of 102 complete questionnaires were returned. Findings reveal that whereas customer involvement has a positive direct effect on technical quality and innovation speed, it has an indirect effect on competitive superiority and sales performance through both technical quality and innovation speed. The study also finds a positive effect of technological novelty as well as technological turbulence on customer involvement. Contrary to expectations, the study does not find any moderating effects of the stage of the development process. This study has several theoretical and managerial implications. In terms of theoretical implications, the study supports the role of technological uncertainty (novelty and turbulence) as an antecedent to customer involvement. It also provides empirical evidence of the impact of customer involvement on operational and market dimensions of new service performance. In terms of managerial implications, the study offers critical insights on how customer involvement in new service development translates into improved new service performance. Furthermore, it reveals that the importance of customer involvement in technologically uncertain contexts and its impact on new service performance are independent of the stage of the development process, suggesting that managers should involve customers throughout the entire development process.     

Interaction capability development of smaller suppliers in relationships with larger customers

The purpose of this paper is to examine the interaction capabilities developed by smaller suppliers in relationships with larger customers. The contribution of the paper is the development and application of an interaction capability framework to evaluate the types of interaction capabilities developed by smaller suppliers that enable them to cope and better manage in relationships with larger customers. The paper reports on eight in-depth case studies comprising forty-eight interviews with smaller UK textile suppliers in relationships with larger customers. The findings identify the features of the smaller suppliers' interaction capability set comprising four elements: human interaction, technological interaction, managerial systems interaction and cultural interaction capability. The paper concludes by evaluating the lessons from the application of the interaction capability framework and highlighting how smaller suppliers can focus on the development of their interaction capability set to gain positioning advantages in their relationships with larger customers and offer superior customer value.     

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.     

Analyzing the Effects of Market and Resource Orientations on Innovative Outcomes in Times of Turbulence*

Innovation and new product success are often a core precursor to superior performance. Although research has examined the resource‐based view (RBV) and market orientation (MO) individually, limited research has evaluated and compared their effect on innovation and new product success in one study. Furthermore, relative to MO, comparatively less research has been conducted to evaluate the relationship between organizational learning (OL) and the RBV to examine their effects on a firm's ability to innovate and succeed. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role of environmental variables (i.e., market turbulence and technological turbulence) on the relationship between two strategic orientations and performance and to extend a previous study. Specifically, it aims to evaluate whether a focus on the customer or the firm will impact innovation, product quality, new product success, financial performance, and customer value in settings of varying environmental turbulence. Data were collected from more than 200 senior executives. LISREL was applied to evaluate the relationships under examination. Interaction effects were assessed using a nested goodness‐of‐fit strategy using a multiple‐group solution. Results depicted significant relationships between organizational learning and both resource and market orientations. Significant relationships also emerged between each strategic orientation and various performance indicators. Interaction effects were observed for market turbulence on customer value and market orientation as well as for resource orientation (RO) on innovation in times of high technological turbulence. The paper concludes with a review of theoretical and managerial implications to stimulate further debate. These results suggest that managers seeking innovation and new product success cannot afford to ignore the environment and do so at their peril. The provision of customer value is essential for positive financial performance. Thus, management needs to monitor environmental contexts so that they are able to adjust their investment in market orientation and the requisite processes that enable its implementation. Conversely, the effects of RO on performance are more robust across industry conditions, presenting an alternative avenue for management to achieve market superiority. The paper concludes with a review of theoretical and managerial implications to stimulate further debate.     

Buyer Market Power and Innovative Activities

This empirical paper deals with the effects of supplier and buyer market concentration on the innovative behavior of suppliers within the German automobile industry. The data set contains firms from all size classes and covers measures of innovation input as well as innovation output. It can be shown that (a) firms' innovation and R & D-employment intensity will decline (increase) in buyer concentrations if supplier markets are low (high) concentrated; (b) buyers' pressure on input prices reduces suppliers' innovation expenditures and their incentive to develop new products; (c) a small number of competitors in suppliers markets and a large stock of customers stimulates innovative behavior; (d) small and medium sized suppliers invest more in their innovative activities but have less probability of realizing innovations than larger firms; and (e) higher technological capabilities lead to higher innovation input and output.     

Managing Diffusion Barriers When Launching New Products

In recent years there has been a growing interest in the link between new product launch activities and market success. So far, most empirical research has focused on launch activities that target customer adoption barriers. However, with such a focus the influence of other stakeholders on innovation diffusion is not taken into account. A review of diffusion research and stakeholder theory serves as a basis for discussing the influence of different stakeholder groups such as customers, dealers, suppliers, and competitors on innovation diffusion. Essentially, it is expected that addressing multiple diffusion barriers during new product launch will have a positive impact on market success. The new concept for launch activities addressing multiple diffusion barriers is tested with data on new product launches in industrial markets using a multiple‐informant approach. The results lend support to the notion that a successful launch requires activities addressing diffusion barriers related to different stakeholder groups. Specifically, barriers related to customers, suppliers, and stakeholders of the further firm environment need to be lowered during market launch. For the group of competitors, a balanced launch approach including measures to both lowering and erecting entry and diffusion barriers will increase the market success of new products. The subsequent investigation of the influence of technological turbulence, market turbulence, and product complexity on the performance relationships shows that under high uncertainty managing multiple‐diffusion barriers is of higher relevance than in more unambiguous, clear‐cut contexts. Thus, the results demonstrate that a careful management of diffusion barriers related to multiple stakeholders is a relevant task when launching a new product. The paper concludes with implications for management practice and avenues for future academic research.     

In Search of Innovation and Customer‐related Performance Superiority: The Role of Market Orientation,Marketing Capability,and Innovation Capability Interactions

Understanding the mechanisms through which firms realize the value of their market‐based knowledge resources such as market orientation is a central interest of innovation scholars and practitioners. The current study contends that realizing the performance impact of market orientation depends on know‐how deployment processes and their complementarities in functional areas such as marketing and innovation that co‐align with market orientation. More specifically, this study addresses two research questions: (1) to what extent can market orientation be transformed into customer‐ and innovation‐related performance outcomes via marketing and innovation capabilities; and (2) does the complementarity between marketing capability and innovation capability enhance customer‐ and innovation‐related performance outcomes? Drawing upon the resource‐based view and capability theory of the firm, a model is developed that integrates market orientation, marketing capability, innovation capability, and customer‐ and innovation‐related performance. The validity of the model is tested based on a sample of 163 manufacturing and services firms. In answer to the first research question, the findings show that market orientation significantly contributes to customer‐ and innovation‐related performance outcomes via marketing and innovation capabilities. This finding is important in that market‐based knowledge resources should be configured with the deployment of marketing and innovation capabilities to ensure better performance. In answer to the second research question, the findings indicate that market orientation works through the complementarity between marketing and innovation capabilities to influence customer‐related performance but not innovation‐related performance. Managers are advised to have a balanced approach to managing the deployment of capabilities. If they seek to achieve superiority in customer‐related performance, marketing capability, innovation capability, and their complementarity are essential for attracting, satisfying, building relationships with, and retaining customers. On the other hand, this complementarity would be considerably less important if firms placed greater emphasis on achieving superiority in innovation‐related performance. In contrast to many existing studies, this study is the first to model the roles of both innovation capability and marketing capability in mediating the relationship between market orientation and specific performance outcomes (i.e., innovation‐ and customer‐related outcomes).     

Innovation in Process Plant: A Case Study of Ethylene

Successful companies in any industry recognize the importance of involving customers and suppliers in the design and development of products and services. When complex product and process technologies are involved, these relationships create a network of companies and industries, each of which is a potential source for technological innovation. At the same time, however, such interrelationships further complicate the already challenging task of analyzing the evolving nature and sources of innovation. Using ethylene manufacture as a case study, Peter Hutcheson, Alan Pearson, and Derrick Ball present a three-stage model of innovation. The model provides a framework for understanding the evolution of technological innovation in ethylene manufacturing, as well as the changing roles of the equipment suppliers, the process plant suppliers, and the operating companies througout this evolution. The applicability of this approach to other sectors of the chemical processing industry is also evaluated. In much the same way that a product's life cycle can be traced through distinct phases of creation, growth, maturity, and decline, technological innovation progresses through three main phases: uncoordinated, segmental, and systemic. The progression through these three phases is marked by changes in the relative levels of product and process innovation activity. In this three-stage model, innovative activity progresses from an extreme of high product and low process innovation during the uncoordinated phase, through the segmental period of low product and high process innovation, to the low product and medium process innovation levels of the systemic phase. In other words, as the industry matures, the focus of innovative activity gradually shifts from the product to the process. As illustrated by the example of ethylene manufacturing, companies operating in an industry that has reached the systemic stage will find little or no scope for innovation in the end product or the core manufacturing technologies. In such a mature market, the product is a commodity item, and the fundamentals of the manufacturing process are well known. At this stage, the quest for productivity improvements focuses on cost reductions from task structuring and specialization, task integration, and automation. As such, equipment manufacturers play an increasingly important role in refining existing technologies and improving equipment reliability and capabilities. Such efforts are facilitated by close cooperation with the operating companies, which can contribute process expertise that the equipment manufacturers might otherwise lack.     

Enabling Innovation through Strategic Synergies

This paper empirically examines the effect that a market orientation (MO) and resource orientation (RO) have on three performance outcomes: financial performance, customer value, and innovation. Individually, the effect each orientation has on performance has been explored but with conflicting results. This study addresses a pertinent gap in the literature by providing insight into a relationship yet unexamined; the role of RO as a moderator of the MO and performance relationship. Although the existing literature considers the role of environmental phenomena as moderators on the MO and performance relationship, the role of alternate orientations has not been studied. While customer value and dynamic resources are needed to succeed, can they each assist the other to perform better? Specifically, does the ability to better develop, deploy, and alter dynamic resources help a firm to better provide customer value to improve performance? This paper is the first to our knowledge to integrate literature from the two paradigms to assess this. Results show that both orientations, when analyzed individually, have a significantly positive effect on all three‐performance outcomes: financial performance, customer value, and innovation. Thus, support for each of the first six hypotheses is provided. The moderated regression provided support for two of the three hypotheses pertaining to this component of the study. It was found that an RO significantly moderates the relationship of an MO with customer value and financial performance but is unable to exert any moderating effect on the MO and innovation relationship because of the dominant role of the RO. Thus, RO appeared superior in delivering innovative outcomes relative to MO. From this, implications, limitations, and recommendations are discussed.     

Exploring proactive market strategies

Proactivity is an important driver of firm performance and for the creation of customer value on business-to-business markets. It is however not entirely clear what it is proactive firms actually do to achieve success. By investigating proactive firms' market strategies, i.e. the sets of activities they perform in order to create superior customer value, a holistic overview of the activities involved in proactive market strategies is provided. Through a case study of five proactive firms, proactive activities are identified. Using three strategic orientations—customer, competition, and innovation orientation—unique proactivity profiles are created, reflecting the patterns in the identified proactive activities. Through these profiles, three overarching proactive market strategies are forwarded: market shaping, customer engagement, and innovation leadership. These are proposed to act as generic proactive market strategies, representing coordinated proactive activities driven by multiple strategic orientations and aimed at creating customer value. These generic strategies help us understand of the role of proactivity in crafting high-performing market strategies by representing different routes to success.     

Managing customer share in key supplier relationships

Supply base consolidation is an important issue in many business markets. Against this background, the allocation of purchasing budgets across vendors becomes an area of vital interest to suppliers. In the present research, we argue that customer share is a key decision variable in business marketing settings and investigate how a supplier can proactively manage the share of its customer's business. We report the results of a cross-sectional study among purchasing managers in U.S. manufacturing industries. Our findings confirm the role of customer value as an antecedent to customer share in business relationships. The study further shows that customer share influences the stability of key supplier relationships. Rather than displaying a direct impact, our results suggest that trust mediates and dependence moderates the link between customer share and search for alternative suppliers. Based on these findings, we propose a framework for managing customer share in key supplier relationships. Four approaches of how industrial vendors can proactively manage customer share are discussed.     

Customer collaboration,service firms' diversification and innovation performance

To sustain competitive advantage, service firms must adapt to the market environment, often by means of diversification and innovation. While extensive research has focussed on the role of customer collaboration in service firm innovation performance, fewer studies have examined the role of firm diversification in this relationship. This study draws on the resource-based view and dynamic capability literature to explore relationships between customer collaboration, diversification and innovation performance of service firms. A conceptual framework was developed and tested using a survey of 156 mining equipment, technology and services (METS) firms in South Australia, and case studies. The findings indicate that service and market diversification mediate the relationship between customer collaboration and innovation performance. Importantly, our findings demonstrate that customer collaboration has no direct effect on the innovation performance of service firms. The research helps practitioners and policymakers to understand the importance of enhancing collaboration across supply chains to build diversified and resilient to downturns in traditional sectors service economies.     

Market Orientation and Innovativeness in Supply Chains: Supplier's Impact on Customer Satisfaction

As today's firms increasingly outsource their noncore activities, they not only have to manage their own resources and capabilities, but they are ever more dependent on the resources and capabilities of supplying firms to respond to customer needs. This paper explicitly examines whether and how firms and suppliers, who are both oriented to the same customer market, enable innovativeness in their supply chains and deliver value to their joint customer. We will call this customer of the focal firm the “end user.” The authors take a resource‐dependence perspective to hypothesize how suppliers' end‐user orientation and innovativeness influence downstream activities at the focal firm and end‐user satisfaction. The resource dependence theory looks typically beyond the boundaries of an individual firm for explaining firm success: firms need to satisfy customer demands to survive and depend on other parties such as their suppliers to achieve customer satisfaction. Accordingly, the research design focuses on three parties along a supply chain: the focal firm, a supplier, and a customer of the focal firm (end user). The results drawn from a survey of 88 matched chains suggest the following. First, customer satisfaction is driven by focal firms' innovativeness. A focal firm's innovativeness depends, on the one hand, on a focal firm's market orientation and, on the other hand, on its suppliers’ innovativeness. Second, no relationship could be established between a focal firm's market orientation and a supplier's end‐user orientation. Market orientation typically has within‐firm effects, while innovativeness has impact beyond the boundaries of the firm. These results suggest that firms create value for their customer through internal market orientation efforts and external suppliers' innovativeness.     

How does green innovation affect supplier-customer relationships? A study on customer and relationship contingencies

As the demand for eco-friendly products arises, many suppliers have devoted significant effort to green innovation. Prior studies have investigated how green innovation influences product and firm performance; however, its influence on the relationship between suppliers and organizational buyers (customers) is still unknown. Organizational buyers' receptivity to green products is uncertain as they must adjust their current systems to accommodate the new products. As such, understanding how supplier green innovation effort affects the supplier-customer relationship is essential for green innovation success. Using data collected from 196 B2B customers, we find that the relationship between supplier green innovation effort and relational performance depends on several customer- and relationship-level contingencies. Specifically, green innovation benefits a relationship more if customer participation and relational embeddedness are high, or if customer risk aversion and customer-perceived product criticality are low. This research provides valuable guidance for the effective implementation of green innovation.     

Architectural Redesign, Interpersonal Communication, and Learning in R&D

An effective R&D organization needs information from a complex web of sources, including customers, suppliers, sales and marketing, and company management. Within the R&D organization, information must flow into and among numerous teams. This network of interpersonal communications can go a long way toward determining the success of a company's innovation efforts. In an exploratory study of a Belgian company operating in the telecommunications industry, Rudy K. Moenaert and Filip Caeldries examine the effects of interpersonal communication on market and technological learning in R&D. Trying to improve the flow of information into and within its R&D organization, this company designed its new R&D facility with an eye toward improving both market and technological learning throughout the organization. By locating R&D personnel in closer proximity to one another, management hoped to provide them with improved access to market and technological information, and thus increase their innovativeness. Contrary to expectations, placing R&D professionals in closer proximity to one another did not increase technological learning in this organization. In fact, technological learning actually decreased slightly during the period studied, though the change is not statistically significant. On the other hand, market learning and product innovativeness improved significantly during the period studied. For an R&D professional in this company, members of other R&D teams seem to be more important as sources of market information than as sources of technological information. Surprisingly, the relocation of R&D personnel also did not increase the amount of communication that takes place, either within a project team, between members of different teams, or between R&D professionals and the management steering committee. However, the architectural redesign does appear to have improved the quality of communication. R&D team leaders report that since the relocation, the information flowing into R&D has been more customer focused. This is attributed to the company's ongoing efforts to provide the tools and structures necessary for supporting the objectives of the architectural redesign. For example, implementation of quality function deployment (QFD) has helped innovation team members to focus more clearly on relevant information. The success of the architectural design required approaching this effort as a complex, ongoing process, rather than a quick-fix solution.     

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.