Perspective: Linking Design Thinking with Innovation Outcomes through Cognitive Bias Reduction

“Design thinking” has generated significant attention in the business press and has been heralded as a novel problem‐solving methodology well suited to the often‐cited challenges business organizations face in encouraging innovation and growth. Yet the specific mechanisms through which the use of design, approached as a thought process, might improve innovation outcomes have not received significant attention from business scholars. In particular, its utility has only rarely been linked to the academic literature on individual cognition and decision‐making. This perspective piece advocates addressing this omission by examining “design thinking” as a practice potentially valuable for improving innovation outcomes by helping decision‐makers reduce their individual level cognitive biases. In this essay, I first review the assumptions, principles, and key process tools associated with design thinking. I then establish its foundation in the decision‐making literature, drawing on an extensive body of research on cognitive biases and their impact. The essay concludes by advancing a set of propositions and research implications, aiming to demonstrate one particular path that future research might take in assessing the utility of design thinking as a method for improving organizational outcomes related to innovation. In doing so, it seeks to address the challenge of conducting academic research on a practice that is obviously popular in management circles but appears resistant to rigorous empirical inquiry because of the multifaceted nature of its “basket” of tools and processes and the complexity of measuring the outcomes it produces.     

Design principles of hybrid approaches in new product development: a systematic literature review

Setting the right approach for new product development (NPD) in the presence of uncertainty remains an ongoing debate in innovation management. Stage-gate systems (SGS) and agile methodology (AM) are the dominant approaches. Recently, hybrid approaches (combining SGS and AM) have been proposed. Although these hybrid approaches represent a significant development in NPD, combining them without considering their design principles might lead to contradictory and competing conceptual formulations, thus increasing the difficulty of comparison among studies. Moreover, scholars and practitioners may struggle to understand when, why and how a certain configuration of the NPD process provides the right response to different manifestations of uncertainty. The current literature faces problems regarding the clarity of design principles (e.g. flexibility and adaptability), and this has led to research gaps concerning the uncertainty contingency and outcomes of hybrid approaches. This study combines bibliometric and content analyses to identify four design parameters and principles of NPD hybrid approaches: flexibility, adaptability, velocity and integration. Our findings might help advance the development and comparison of different hybrid approaches.     

Disruptiveness of innovations: measurement and an assessment of reliability and validity

Strategic management scholars have long explored the broad topic of innovation, a cornerstone in creating competitive advantage. Any attempt at theory construction in this area must encompass reliable and valid measures for key innovation characteristics. Yet, with respect to an important construct, i.e., disruptiveness of innovations, there has been relatively little academic research. Without formalizing the disruptiveness concept with a reliable and valid measure, it is difficult to conduct rigorous research to uncover the causes of the innovator's dilemma and identify mechanisms to help incumbents develop such innovations. In this paper, we develop a scale for the disruptiveness of innovations. We collected data from senior executives (vice president or general manager level) at 199 strategic business units (SBUs) in 38 Fortune 500 corporations and performed a series of analyses to establish the reliability and validity of the disruptiveness scale. The reliability measures, exploratory factor analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and subsequent statistical tests strongly support our measure. Further, we also present nomological validity of the disruptiveness construct, thus establishing its predictive validity. Thus, this paper distinguishes the disruptiveness concept from other established innovation constructs, such as radicalness and competency destroying. Finally, we discuss the significance of our results and how this study might be useful to other researchers. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A service design perspective on the stakeholder engagement journey during B2B innovation: Challenges and future research agenda

Innovation in business-to-business (B2B) contexts deals with highly dynamic, complex, and heterogeneous constellations of stakeholders with a diversity of goals, motives, and capabilities that further challenge successful management of B2B innovation processes and outcomes. Complex challenges, such as sustainability and digitization trends, push these B2B firms to embrace new innovation methods that help them manage disruptive change. Service design thinking has emerged as an innovation management practice emphasizing a human-centered innovation process of user interactions, creativity, and learning mindsets. In this article, we aim to evaluate the challenges and develop a research agenda on how service design can effectively enable stakeholders' engagement during the B2B innovation process. We argue that to advance service design opportunities for stakeholder engagement, we need to address the unique complexities and challenges of stakeholder engagement during innovation from a systemic and dynamic process perspective. From a systemic perspective, we zoom in on the building blocks of stakeholder engagement and address multi-level stakeholder engagement platforms (i.e., innovation networks). From a dynamic process perspective, we treat stakeholder engagement as an emerging process and zoom in on the temporal and relational connections and hybrid orchestration to allow for both structural and emerging stakeholder engagement during innovation. We develop a stakeholder engagement journey in which we integrate service and innovation stages and propose how service design activities can support and facilitate the aforementioned challenges and complexities. Finally, we identify concrete research questions and, accordingly, develop a research agenda for future research on stakeholder engagement in B2B innovation trajectories.     

Organizational Attributes,Market Growth,and Product Innovation

Extensive research has shown that organizational attributes affect product innovation. Extending this literature, this article delimits two general categories of organizational attributes and relates them to product innovation. Organizational attributes can be either control oriented or flexibility oriented. Control‐oriented organizational attributes strive to realize organizational activities as intended, while flexibility‐oriented attributes allow organizational activities to emerge in a directed way. The classical institutional theory suggests that organizational attributes, no matter whether they are control oriented or flexibility oriented, serve two major functions: a constraining function and an enabling function. Recognizing the dual functions of organizational attributes, this article argues that both types of organizational attributes are indispensable for the functioning of innovative organizations and that the impacts of control‐oriented organizational attributes on product innovation decrease with market growth, while the impacts of flexibility‐oriented organizational attributes on product innovation increase with market growth. Empirical results largely support these hypotheses. Strategic planning, as a control‐oriented organizational attribute, is positively associated with product innovativeness, regardless of the market growth rate. The effectiveness of other organizational attributes, including formalization and organizational redundancy, varies with market conditions. As the rate of market growth increases, formalization becomes less effective for, but never becomes detrimental to, product innovativeness. Conversely, as the rate of market growth increases, organizational redundancy becomes more effective for product innovativeness. Overall, the results show that both control‐oriented and flexibility‐oriented elements are indispensable for the design of innovative organizations.     

Actors' Heterogeneity in Innovation Networks

Several interpretations converge in defining innovation networks as formed by heterogeneous actors, mainly identified in universities, research centers, and business companies. While the issue of actors' heterogeneity has generated active debate in strategy and organization studies, there has been little discussion so far in exploring the role of this diversity in innovation networks.Drawn from previous literature, we identify six attributes of actors' heterogeneity which seem to matter for the development of collaborative innovation: goals, knowledge bases, capabilities and competences, perceptions, power and position, culture. This paper is aimed at pursuing issues in need of further investigation. In particular 1. how the interplay of diverse actors' attributes shapes the interaction process in the development of collaborative innovation; 2. if and how combinations of their attributes are more likely to generate certain consequences in interaction; and 3. the degree to which heterogeneity is preferable to homogeneity for the effectiveness of innovation networks. In a recursive relationship, we also call for more research on the mechanisms that lead actors' attributes to change as an effect of interaction as well as on the interaction capabilities actors apply to manage heterogeneity.     

Innovation and Design in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

At the heart of any innovation process lies a fundamental practice: the way people create ideas and solve problems. This “decision making” side of innovation is what scholars and practitioners refer to as “design.” Decisions in innovation processes have so far been taken by humans. What happens when they can be substituted by machines? Artificial Intelligence (AI) brings data and algorithms to the core of the innovation processes. What are the implications of this diffusion of AI for our understanding of design and innovation? Is AI just another digital technology that, akin to many others, will not significantly question what we know about design? Or will it create transformations in design that current theoretical frameworks cannot capture? This paper proposes a framework for understanding the design and innovation in the age of AI. We discuss the implications for design and innovation theory. Specifically, we observe that, as creative problem-solving is significantly conducted by algorithms, human design increasingly becomes an activity of sensemaking, that is, understanding which problems should or could be addressed. This shift in focus calls for the new theories and brings design closer to leadership, which is, inherently, an activity of sensemaking. Our insights are derived from and illustrated with two cases at the frontier of AI—Netflix and Airbnb (complemented with analyses of Microsoft and Tesla)—which point to two directions for the evolution of design and innovation in firms. First, AI enables an organization to overcome many past limitations of human-intensive design processes, by improving the scalability of the process, broadening its scope across traditional boundaries, and enhancing its ability to learn and adapt on the fly. Second, and maybe more surprising, while removing these limitations, AI also appears to deeply enact several popular design principles. AI thus reinforces the principles of Design Thinking, namely: being people-centered, abductive, and iterative. In fact, AI enables the creation of solutions that are more highly user centered than human-based approaches (i.e., to an extreme level of granularity, designed for every single person); that are potentially more creative; and that are continuously updated through learning iterations across the entire product life cycle. In sum, while AI does not undermine the basic principles of design, it profoundly changes the practice of design. Problem-solving tasks, traditionally carried out by designers, are now automated into learning loops that operate without limitations of volume and speed. The algorithms embedded in these loops think in a radically different way than a designer who handles the complex problems holistically with a systemic perspective. Algorithms instead handle complexity through very simple tasks, which are iterated continuously. This paper discusses the implications of these insights for design and innovation management scholars and practitioners.     

Using design thinking to respond to crises: B2B lessons from the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic

We examine the value of design thinking in times of crisis. Drawing on examples of firm innovations during the 2020 Covid-19 lockdown, we propose that disruptive events represent wicked problems that require managers to break out of established patterns of thinking. Design thinking, or the problem solving approaches and tools of designers, represents one such approach. Drawing on extant research, we identify a three-stage process of design thinking: disrupt, develop and deliver, and transform. We examine each stage, identifying how careful disruptive thinking with a focus on understanding problems within their context can give rise to innovative solutions, resulting in a more resilient organisation.     

The Decision to Exploit an R&D Project: Divergent Thinking across Middle and Senior Managers

Research and development (R&D) generates projects, but the question often remains: which projects should be exploited? Building on the innovation, strategy, and managerial cognition literatures, we use a conjoint field experiment to collect data on 4032 decisions made by 126 R&D managers to test how project attributes, strategic context, and managers' characteristics influence innovation exploitation decisions. Using hierarchical linear modeling, we find that (1) experience impacts project exploitation decision policies of middle managers more than senior managers, (2) divergent thinking across middle and senior managers increases with experience, and (3) experienced middle managers diverge from experienced senior managers in their decisions to exploit opportunities by placing greater emphasis on strategic context (relative to competitors and fit within the portfolio) and lesser emphasis on uncertainty (technological and demand). These findings have implications for the strategy and innovation literature.     

Perspective: Understanding the Nature and Measurement of the Lead User Construct

The lead user concept has attracted a lot of attention from scholars and practitioners alike. However, different studies apply different conceptualizations and measures of the lead user construct. Such variation in measurement of the construct make it almost impossible to consolidate findings from prior lead user research, which in turn hampers the accumulation of insights on the concept itself. This is also a challenge with respect to managerial practice: due to different interpretations of the concept, managers and R&D staff find it difficult to identify lead users for workshops and cooperation, and companies are often unable to transfer results from lead user projects to new product and business development. As a result, they only rarely repeat their work with lead users. The aim of this article is therefore to provide some thoughts and guidance on the conceptualization and measurement of the lead user construct.     

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

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

Capture,governance, and resilience: strategy implications from the history of Rome

Organizational resilience is a subject of great interest to management and strategy scholars. Drawing on over 1,000 years of historical data on the Republic of Rome, and focusing primarily on the period of its establishment (509 BC–338 BC), we identify two generic strategies, capture and governance, that together are essential for organizational resilience. Capture strategy relates to market expansions, while governance strategy refers to the capacity of an organization to assimilate, retain, defend, and increase its dominance within annexed markets. The history of Rome also reveals four supporting tactics—saving power, maintaining a stronghold base, isolating and weakening adversaries, and creating forward outposts—that shore up and reinforce the capture and governance strategies, to create a more enduring and resilient enterprise. Interestingly, a system‐wide view of the strategy‐tactic framework also offers insights on resilience through smallness, thus illustrating its conceptual utility to organizations of all sizes including small enterprises. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

现代工程管理理论与知识体系框架(二)

建设工程管理知识创新发展的内在规律和建设工程管理知识体系框架的研究日益受到学者们的关注。针对建设工程的单件性和开发工程对管理知识及其创新的依赖程度越发提高的特点,分析了工程管理知识体系及其发展维度,包括思维发展维度和知识结构模块发展维度;给出了工程管理知识创新模式和结构模式;梳理并提出了在工程思维模式下工程管理知识体系框架,包括工程管理研究所依据的基础知识体系框架和工程管理可应用的知识体系框架。     

Advancing social media driven sales research: Establishing conceptual foundations for B-to-B social selling

Business markets are facing major changes due to an increasing digitalization trend and consequent changes in buying behaviors. Practitioners and academics alike have started to emphasize social selling as a novel way to tackle these emerging opportunities and challenges at the sales force level. Since research in this area remains embryonic and fragmented, we adopt a discovery-oriented research approach and conceptualize social selling and its key facets based on a systematic literature review and a field study involving thought leading social selling professionals. The findings indicate a need to extend the research focus from social media usage into a concept which comprehends social selling as a broader application of digital marketing principles at the individual salesperson level. Social selling leverages social and digital channels for understanding, connecting with, and engaging influencers, prospects and existing customers at relevant customer purchasing journey touchpoints for building valuable business relationships. We relate the construct to other close selling approaches and explicate its organizational strategy components as well as performance outcomes. The findings advance current understanding of the role of sales in contemporary business markets and have implications for sales and marketing theory and practice.     

Industry Platforms and Ecosystem Innovation

This paper brings together the recent literature on industry platforms and shows how it relates to managing innovation within and outside the firm as well as to dealing with technological and market disruptions and change over time. First, we identify distinct types of platforms. Our analysis of a wide range of industry examples suggests that there are two predominant types of platforms: internal or company‐specific platforms, and external or industry‐wide platforms. We define internal (company or product) platforms as a set of assets organized in a common structure from which a company can efficiently develop and produce a stream of derivative products. We define external (industry) platforms as products, services, or technologies that act as a foundation upon which external innovators, organized as an innovative business ecosystem, can develop their own complementary products, technologies, or services. Second, we summarize from the literature general propositions on the design, economics, and strategic management of platforms. Third, we review the case of Intel and other examples to illustrate the range of technological, strategic, and business challenges that platform leaders and their competitors face as markets and technologies evolve. Finally, we identify practices associated with effective platform leadership and avenues for future research to deepen our understanding of this important phenomenon and what firms can do to manage platform‐related competition and innovation.     

Never Forget Where You're Coming from: The Role of Existing Products in Adoptions of Substituting Technologies

The adoption of technological product innovations has received considerable attention among academics and practitioners alike, although the circumstances in which a new technology seeks to replace an existing product have remained largely overlooked. Research into the adoption of substituting technologies should incorporate this perspective, which provides insights into how technology adoption depends on the existing situation. From this perspective, the authors investigate how consumers' emphasis on an existing product's attributes influences their adoption of a substituting innovation. Data obtained from 217 respondents indicates that consumers' liking of an existing product's attributes can prompt a negative affective reaction to the substituting technology. This negative affective reaction in turn may lead to less positive cognitive evaluations of the substituting technology and affect consumers' adoption intentions. This investigation complements existing research in two important ways: First, the results emphasize the importance of taking existing products into account when studying the adoption of substituting technologies. Second, this study adds to the sparse findings regarding the link between affect and cognition in technology adoption contexts.     

The Transformation of the Innovation Process: How Digital Tools are Changing Work,Collaboration, and Organizations in New Product Development*

Over the past several decades, digitization has invaded all areas of human activity, including innovation. The result of digitization of existing tools for design and collaboration, and the introduction of entirely new digital tools, is a far more substantive change of innovation than previous generations of tools enabled. It affects not only the quality of the output and speed of its generation, but it affects the innovation work itself, changes work content, collaboration patterns, decision authority, organizational set‐ups, governance structures, firm boundaries, and ultimately entire ecosystems. In this paper, the digitization of New Product Development (NPD), a subset of innovation, is studied to pursue two research questions: (1) How has the digital tool landscape in NPD changed over the past 15 years, and (2) how have these changes affected how firms innovate? This research uses a longitudinal multi‐method, qualitative approach to deep dive into actual use cases of digital design tools such as computer‐aided design CAD and new tools such as collaborative information technology (CIT). The changes in these tools and observations into how these tools are transforming the very nature of how things are designed is the research focus of this study. These tools have become increasingly more sophisticated while being easier to use and are integrated earlier in the design process. As a result, digital tools have a far broader reaching impact than previous generation of tools. Not only do they affect output and process efficiency, but they also increase depth and breadth of the work of individual innovators, they lead to rearrangement of the entire innovation processes, enable new configurations of people, teams, and firms, and rewrite the rules on how knowledge management acts as a critical competitive capability. The progression of digitization is laying the groundwork for changes to what firms are and do and points to different ways of organizing, specializing, and training for NPD professionals.     

Conceptualizing Innovation Orientation: A Framework for Study and Integration of Innovation Research*

The term innovation orientation has been frequently used in the innovation literature, but with a mix of conceptualizations and meanings. Drawing from work found in the innovation, management, and marketing literatures over the past 35 years, the concept of innovation orientation as a system is conceptualized and defined in this article. The domain of innovation orientation is delineated as a multidimensional knowledge structure and a framework for understanding innovation orientation and its consequences in an organizational context are developed. The framework defines the innovation orientation knowledge structure as composed of a learning philosophy, strategic direction, and transfunctional beliefs within an organization that define and direct the organizational strategies and actions toward specific innovation‐enabling competencies and processes. These innovation‐oriented firm competencies are in the areas of resource allocation, technology, employees, operations, and markets. The framework then explains that these appropriately developed innovation‐enabling competencies lead to innovation outcomes, specifically ideal innovation form, type, and rate that, in turn, affect firm performance. An inventory of propositions for future research that correspond to the innovation orientation concept is also presented in this comprehensive framework. This study provides two important contributions to the existing innovation literature. First, the article examines the vast innovation literature to arrive at a clear definition of the innovation orientation construct to provide a consistent conceptualization for future research. Second, the article develops a comprehensive, organized framework for understanding innovation orientation and its effects. In doing this, the framework extends the dynamic capabilities research stream by offering an explanation of how innovation orientation fosters the development of organizational competencies and makes it possible for a firm to recognize and respond to shifts in market dynamism.     

“To Own or Not to Own?” A Study on the Determinants and Consequences of Alternative Intellectual Property Rights Arrangements in Crowdsourcing for Innovation Contests

Firms are increasingly engaging in crowdsourcing for innovation to access new knowledge beyond their boundaries; however, scholars are no closer to understanding what guides seeker firms in deciding the level at which to acquire rights from solvers and the effect that this decision has on the performance of crowdsourcing contests. Integrating property rights theory and the problem‐solving perspective while leveraging exploratory interviews and observations, we build a theoretical framework to examine how specific attributes of the technical problem broadcast by firms affect the seekers’ choice between alternative intellectual property rights (IPR) arrangements that call for acquiring or licensing‐in IPR from external solvers (i.e., with high and low degrees of ownership, respectively). Each technical problem differs in the knowledge required to be solved as well as in the stage of development of the innovation process and seeker firms pay great attention to such characteristics when deciding about the IPR arrangement they choose for their contests. In addition, we analyze how this choice between acquiring and licensing‐in IPR, in turn, influences the performance of the contest. We empirically test our hypotheses analyzing a unique dataset of 729 challenges broadcast on the InnoCentive platform from 2010 to 2016. Our results indicate that challenges related to technical problems in later stages of the innovation process are positively related to the seekers’ preference toward IPR arrangements with a high level of ownership, while technical problems involving a higher number of knowledge domains are not. Moreover, we found that IPR arrangements with a high level of ownership negatively affect solvers’ participation and that IPR arrangement play a mediating role between the attributes of the technical problem and the solvers’ self‐selection process. Our paper contributes to the open innovation and crowdsourcing literature and provides practical implications for both managers and contest organizers.     

Being Innovative While Being Green: An Experimental Inquiry into How Consumers Respond to Eco‐Innovative Product Designs

Eco‐innovations are an effective way for companies to strategically align themselves with customers’ growing environmental concerns. Despite their crucial role, scant research has focused on eco‐innovative product designs. Drawing from the sustainability and innovation literature, this article proposes that in the design of an eco‐innovation, its degree of innovativeness, level of eco‐friendliness, and detachability significantly affect consumers' adoption intentions. This article develops various conceptual models tested through three independent online experiments with U.S. consumers. The findings support the hypotheses and provide useful insights into the underlying mechanisms of how and why consumers respond to eco‐innovative product designs across various high‐tech product categories. Specifically, the results show (1) a positive effect of innovativeness degrees of eco‐innovative attributes on consumers' perceptions of product eco‐friendliness and on their adoption intentions as well as a significant moderating role of consumers' need for cognition (Study 1); (2) a positive influence of eco‐friendliness levels of eco‐innovative attributes on consumer adoption intentions in the case of high‐complexity products but not for low‐complexity products, emphasizing the need to adopt different approaches when developing eco‐innovations to ensure favorable consumer reactions (Study 2); and (3) a significant impact of the detachability of eco‐innovative attributes on consumers' perceptions of trade‐offs between environmental benefits and product functionality and on their intentions to adopt eco‐innovations (Study 3). These findings add to existing theoretical knowledge, provide actionable managerial implications, and identify fruitful avenues for future research.