Journal of Product Innovation Management最新文献

To date, innovation management research on idea evaluation has focused on human experts and crowd evaluators. With recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI), idea evaluation and selection processes need to keep up. As a result, the potential role of AI-enabled systems in idea evaluation has become an important topic in innovation management research and practice. While AI can help overcome human capacity constraints and biases, prior research has identified also aversive behaviors of humans toward AI. However, research has also shown lay people's appreciation of AI. This study focuses on human crowdvoters’ AI adoption behavior. More precisely, we focus on gig workers, who despite often lacking expert knowledge are frequently engaged in crowdvoting. To investigate crowdvoters' AI adoption behavior, we conducted a behavioral experimental study (n = 629) with incentive-compatible rewards in a human-AI augmentation scenario. The participants had to predict the success or failure of crowd-generated ideas. In multiple rounds, participants could opt to delegate their decisions to an AI-enabled system or to make their own evaluations. Our findings contribute to the innovation management literature on open innovation, more specifically crowdvoting, by observing how human crowdvoters engage with AI. In addition to showing that the lay status of gig workers does not lead to an appreciation of AI, we identify factors that foster AI adoption in this specific innovation context. We hereby find mixed support for influencing factors previously identified in other contexts, including financial incentives, social incentives, and the provision of information about AI-enabled system's functionality. A second novel contribution of our empirical study is, however, the fading of crowdvoters’ aversive behavior over time.

Framing is a powerful tool shaping innovation success, failure, and transformation. However, innovation framing is not recognized as a unified domain of research and the extant literature is theoretically fragmented across diverse fields. Inconsistencies in definition and operationalization of constructs stall theoretical advancement of innovation framing theory and practice. Importantly, an understanding of the underlying mechanisms enabling framing to mediate innovation outcomes has been missing. Using a systematic literature review (SLR), we integrate diverse theoretical perspectives. Stemming from this, we develop a unified conceptual framework of innovation framing. In so doing we make three vital contributions to the field. First, we develop a typology of construct categories of innovation framing, defining these framing concepts and identifying their theoretical basis. Next, we emphasize the importance of key mechanisms (sensemaking, interpretive flexibility, consensus) in explaining innovation outcomes. Our third contribution identifies innovation stage-specific differences in the role of framing processes, frame types and characteristics, and the temporal elements of these. Finally, we discuss the implications of our research for innovation practitioners, while concluding with a detailed agenda for future innovation framing research.

Why are some firms more resilient when systemic shocks like the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) or COVID-19 pandemic set in? We approach this question by arguing that a firm's pre-shock strategic emphasis on innovation can mitigate the consequences of such shocks by facilitating stability and flexibility, major components of organizational resilience, as the shock sets in. We test our arguments empirically by analyzing data from 2003 to 2011 on as many as 994 firms from the S&P 1500 to identify the causes of their resilience during the 2008 GFC. Our findings indicate that pre-shock product introductions and, to some extent, top management's focus on innovation can facilitate stability and flexibility when a shock occurs, while R&D intensity and patents, other dimensions of a strategic emphasis on innovation, do so only when firm profitability before the shock is low. In this way, we direct innovation research's attention to the additional performance benefits of innovation activities when shocks occur and reveal which dimensions of a strategic emphasis on innovation buffer the negative consequences of a shock, thus providing insights into how innovation helps firms be resilient. Further, our theorizing and empirical findings unveil an intriguing paradox: While existing research tends to find positive associations between innovation and profitability in “regular” times, strong pre-shock profitability impairs innovation's ability to unfold its effects fully at shock onset.

Chen, Yongjian, Nicole Coviello, and Chatura Ranaweera. 2021. “When Change is All Around: How Dynamic Network Capability and Generative NPD Learning Shape a Firm's Capacity for Major Innovation.” Journal of Product Innovation Management 38(5): 574–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpim.12595.

On page 581, a paragraph break was missing between Hypothesis 4 and the subsequent discussion of Hypothesis 5. Specifically, Hypothesis 4 states that “Higher levels of external dynamism strengthen the relationship between a firm's dynamic network capability and generative NPD learning.” The text that follows Hypothesis 4 should have started a new paragraph, marking the beginning of the discussion for Hypothesis 5.

This correction addresses a formatting error and does not affect the content of the article.

We apologize for this error.

Grand challenges vary across industries and call for firms to craft a responsible innovation response to effectively address them. However, key questions concerning why firms embrace responsible innovation and the process by which they respond to grand challenges have yet to be fully answered. We integrate an issue-selling theoretical lens and the customer role from an innovation perspective to theorize about the different influencing motives that customers exert on their corresponding supplying firm to craft a more responsible innovation response to grand challenges. Based on qualitative data collected in almost a 10-year period from multiple respondents across eight customer firms and two supplying firms, we identify three core motives—regulatory, business opportunity, and socio-environmental motives—that propel customers to influence supplying firms to craft different forms of responsible innovation responses. Our research also reveals three vital socio-human capital pathways—human capital, socio-behavioral, and relationship—which, in turn, foster a co-active engagement in addressing grand challenges innovatively and responsibly. In so doing, this research advances novel theorizing on co-active engagement in responsible innovation where the customer acts as the primary champion and the supplier as the implementer. We discuss the important implications for customers and other stakeholders.

How orchestrating external, supplier-provided resources affects product innovation is an important question. While product innovation is essential to achieve a competitive advantage, it is costly as it requires significant investments. It thus puts a severe strain on firm resources, which is particularly critical for resource-scarce small–medium enterprises (SMEs). Therefore, these firms must combine their own resources with those of external parties, particularly suppliers, to enhance their product innovation. However, knowledge about how orchestrating these resources affects product innovation is limited, because empirical studies on resource orchestration have largely focused on firm-internal resources; furthermore, there is ambiguity regarding the extent to which drawing on external resources is beneficial. In addition, the conditions that affect the resource orchestration–product innovation relationship remain unexplored. Therefore, we focus on supplier logistics integration (SLI), an important resource orchestration action referring to the orchestration of external, supplier-provided resources; we draw on the resource orchestration framework and the related work on organizational rigidity to theorize that there is an inverted U-shaped relationship between SLI and product innovation. Additionally, we suggest that learning orientation and environmental dynamism mitigate rigidities associated with high levels of SLI and thus facilitate the translation of SLI into product innovation. Testing our hypotheses with data from Swedish SMEs supports our theorizing and provides important contributions. Most importantly, we extend the resource orchestration framework to include the focus on external, supplier-provided resources, thereby advancing our knowledge and understanding of resource orchestration for product innovation in SMEs.

The business model innovation (BMI) concept has become a well-established phenomenon of current academic research. While Foss and Saebi's (Journal of Management, 2017, 43, 200–227) seminal literature review on BMI revealed 349 articles on BMI published between 1972 and 2015, an additional number of 1727 articles on the topic have been published since 2016. In contrast to this overall interest in the BMI phenomenon, innovation-focused journals include only a limited number of publications on BMI. Further, besides the valuable insights and fruitful research directions of extant literature reviews, they tend also to overlook the linkages between traditional innovation management and the majority of BMI research. Given this underrepresentation of BMI research in the innovation management literature, we conduct an integrative literature review to bring the disconnected literature closer together and offer directions for future research. Our literature review applies the review strategy of blending and merging the literature across domains. First, we blend the knowledge base of the BMI domain by applying the Product Development and Management Association (PDMA) Body of Knowledge categories. Second, we merge the literature across domains by developing an integrative framework. As recent BMI literature increasingly converged to two lines of research, our framework differentiates between the relatedness of the BMI and BMI openness. Thereby, we offer new avenues for future research that can enrich the dialogue on BMI research in the innovation management community. These results demonstrate how the BMI domain covers aspects that fit, contribute to, and extend classical innovation-focused research, how both research domains can be merged to enrich each other, and how future research can foster the dialogue across disconnected domains.

Although the effects of openness to experience (OTE) on individual creativity are well-established, research on how such effects unfold in a team context is scarce. Drawing on theories of group norms and uncertainty reduction, we argue that team mean OTE leads to a climate of team psychological safety which, in turn, facilitates team creativity. We test our hypothesis over three independent studies, the first comprising 35 business student project teams, the second based on 28 professional teams from the automotive industry, both conducted in the United Kingdom, and the third comprising 24 healthcare teams in Portugal. As predicted, across all three studies, team mean OTE was positively associated with team creativity via the affective emergent state of team psychological safety. Furthermore, the mediating role of team psychological safety remained significant even when accounting for team OTE variance, alternative motivational and cognitive emergent states, namely team promotion focus (studies 1 and 2) and team exploration climate (study 3), as well as empowering leadership (study 3). Finally, in study 3, we examined the differential impact of the two major facets of OTE, intellect, and openness, and found that intellect, but not openness, was responsible for driving the indirect effects. Further analysis did not support alternative perspectives concerning team OTE variance or the interaction between mean and variance. Our findings not only contribute to theoretical understanding regarding the relationship between team personality composition, specifically OTE, and team creativity but also provide much-needed insight into how such effects unfold. We delineate several practical implications for team design and development.

The present study seeks to shed further light on what favors the conversion of inventions into innovations in for-profit firms and to advance our understanding of how to tackle cancer grand challenges (CGCs). Specifically, following the literature on knowledge search and recombination, we analyze whether and how cancer-related inventions developed through an intense adoption of scientific knowledge (scientific search intensity) result in (i) a higher number of approved drugs and (ii) a shorter approval time for new drugs. Notably, while the role of science with regard to technological development has been widely studied, the extent to which science-based solutions relate to new product introduction, especially in terms of coping with grand challenges such as approved cancer drugs, is less known. Furthermore, considering the digitization of (health) R&D and the role of information and communication technologies (i.e., digital technologies) to address grand challenges, we examine whether and how cancer-related inventions developed through an intense adoption of digital knowledge (digital search intensity) directly affect the extent and speed of cancer drug approval, as well as whether interaction effects between scientific and digital search intensity exist. We develop hypotheses that we test on a sample of 65,861 cancer-related patents owned by 139 for-profit firms, collected from the USPTO Cancer Moonshot Patent Data. These have a priority date between 1990 and 2010, and have led to 1035 approved drugs. Results reveal that scientific search intensity is not associated with the number of different drugs developed from a single cancer-related invention but is associated with the speed at which the invention leads to a newly approved drug. Digital search intensity appears not to directly affect cancer drug approval, but it lessens the effects of scientific search intensity, thus pointing to a limit of digitization in cancer R&D and innovation processes.

In recent decades, multinational enterprises (MNEs) have increasingly harnessed local knowledge through various customer involvement practices implemented by their foreign subsidiaries. Our study, using a multi-informant survey of 230 MNE subsidiaries in China, explores how these subsidiaries manage customer involvement in new product development (NPD). We specifically focus on two practices: using customers as an information source (CIS) or as a co-developer (CIC). We posit that the two types of customer involvement have distinct effects on a subsidiary's innovation capability, which in turn impacts two critical NPD outcomes: innovativeness and speed to market. Moreover, we suggest that the roles that customers play in CIS and CIC, as well as their contribution to the subsidiary's innovation capability, depend on whether the specific knowledge is derived from the parent headquarters or local partners. Our findings reveal that technological knowledge transfer from the parent headquarters enhances CIS's effect on innovation capability, yet diminishes that of CIC. In contrast, knowledge sharing from local partners exerts the opposite effects. By elucidating the underlying mechanisms and contingencies, our study fosters a deeper understanding of customer involvement in NPD and provides insightful guidance for MNEs seeking to leverage local knowledge for successful innovations in foreign markets.