Journal of Product Innovation Management最新文献

Research about innovation management explores how the future is created—who is creating it (organizations, collaborations, etc.), for what aims (customer satisfaction, market performance, etc.), and with what broader effects (social, environmental, etc.). With this extended essay, we explore the potential futures of innovation management research in three ways. First, we briefly review the history of past research agendas and priorities published in the Journal of Product Innovation Management (JPIM), highlighting three broad topic areas (technological, social/environmental, and organizational) that have emerged over time and their potential disruptive implications for innovation management research. Second, we describe the outcome of a gathering of leading scholars in innovation management tasked with the challenge of identifying critical research paths for our field. This collaboration resulted in five “deep dive” essays into areas ripe for innovation management research in the years ahead: liquid innovation, artificial intelligence in innovation, business model innovation, public value innovation, and responsible innovation. Third, we reflect on this expansive effort and offer a discussion of implications (tensions, challenges, and opportunities) for future innovation management scholarship.

Technological innovation is critical for high-tech new ventures (HTNVs), and the position of Chief Technology Officer (CTO) has become increasingly crucial in top management teams (TMTs). Drawing upon the upper echelons theory and the attention-based view of the firm, we examined a sample of 429 HTNVs in China between 2014 and 2019 to test whether and how appointing a CTO and the CTO's characteristics affect the new ventures' innovation activities. The results show that having a CTO position promotes HTNVs' exploratory innovation activities but does not affect exploitative innovation activities. While a longer CTO tenure positively affects exploratory innovation, it hinders exploitative innovation. In addition, a CEO serving as the CTO in a HTNV has a negative effect on exploitative innovation activities but no effect on exploratory innovation activities. This effect is contingent on the CEO's technological background and whether the CEO owns shares in the HTNV. The findings of this study enrich the literature on the upper echelons theory, the attention-based view, and entrepreneurship and innovation and provide rare empirical evidence on whether and how appointing a CTO, CTO characteristics, and the interaction of CTO characteristics and CEO characteristics affect HTNVs' innovation activities in emerging markets.

Innovation politics impact the development and introduction of innovations, yet knowledge about the influence of specific political behavior or behavioral patterns remains blurred. Based on a literature review and the articles in this Special Issue, we propose a three-part framework that identifies the building blocks of political behavior in innovation: what motivates actors to be political, the different types of political actors, and the effect of various political behaviors on innovation outcomes. Emphasizing the evolving landscape of innovation politics, the framework aims to highlight research gaps and guide future studies toward improving our understanding of the functional and dysfunctional aspects of innovation politics.

In industrial product development with customers, it is well-known that lead userness is associated with novel and commercially attractive products. We take a next step by analyzing if lead userness is related to product development that potentially affects industry-level practices. Our main hypothesis is that lead userness results in the pursuit of Schumpeterian product opportunities: disequilibrating, radical, rare, and based on new knowledge and creative activities. In contrast, at low lead userness, more Kirznerian product opportunities are expected—which maintain industry standards. The hypothesis is supported by data from 139 high-tech small firms. Next, we anticipate that factors related to the selection of lead users, and the effective processing of their inputs, moderate the connection between lead userness and Schumpeterian opportunity. As for selection, we find a stronger connection when firms collaborate with “new” customers. Conversely, when involved customers have been business partners already for a long time, the pursuit of Schumpeterian opportunities is mitigated. Also, tentative evidence is found that the connection between lead userness and Schumpeterian opportunity amplifies when involved customers are less dominant market players. Finally, when it comes to processing lead users' input, we report tentative evidence that firms' R&D intensity should be higher (indicating ability to process lead users' inputs and make continued development efforts). Our findings help to explain why lead users have been associated with industry dynamics, and provide guidance to identify “relevant” lead users when firms seek product opportunities that potentially disequilibrate their industry.

Firms that capture the benefits of innovation opportunities ahead of their rivals achieve superior rates of organic growth. These growth leaders don't wait for opportunities to appear before reacting. Instead, they systematically search for opportunities to select for development. Qualitative case analyses of four growth leaders found that each used two types of heuristics or rules of thumb while capturing innovation opportunities. Their top-down strategy heuristics were revealed with a wide-spectrum framework that reimagined and stretched each dimension of their strategy. Growth leaders also used bottom-up process heuristics to routinize and share their approaches to capturing innovation opportunities throughout their organization. These heuristics are a useful lens for studying innovation practices and suggest fruitful avenues for further research.

Developing innovative, eco-friendlier products that gain traction in the mass market remains a persistent challenge for many firms. To bring consumers to choose “greener” alternatives over conventional products, firms need to overcome prevailing product evaluations that favor traditional solutions. Research on valuation entrepreneurship examines the strategies that actors apply to induce changes in established evaluations. Adding to the emerging literature on valuation entrepreneurship, our study analyzes how the car maker Tesla, Inc. used product design—material artifacts' properties of form and function—to advance the public perception of battery electric vehicles (BEVs). When Tesla entered the market, several firms had tried to promote BEVs as a way of making private mobility more environmentally friendly, but with limited success. In contrast, Tesla produced well-received BEVs that generated enormous consumer interest and led to a more favorable assessment of BEVs as a whole. Drawing on 54 interviews and nearly 2000 pages of archival data, our abductive study identifies three product design strategies that increased the appeal of Tesla's initial models: (1) incorporating discontinuous technological solutions; (2) optimizing the products on traditional evaluation criteria (e.g., driving performance, comfort, space, status); and (3) creating an ecosystem of complementary products. Since some design choices came at the expense of a minimal environmental footprint, they risked attracting blame for compromising on the environmental performance of potentially eco-friendly cars and for committing “greenwashing.” To minimize this risk, Tesla complemented its design strategies by employing three strategies of reputational politics to avoid such blame. After Tesla's initial, lavish models had improved the public perception of electric cars, Tesla and other car makers were able to sell less excessive and more sustainable BEVs in much greater quantities than ever before. Our findings contribute to three literature streams and generate valuable insights for management practice.