IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v112y2022ics0166497221001917.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting the innovation dynamics theory: How effectiveness- and efficiency-oriented process innovations accompany product innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Wittfoth, Sven
  • Berger, Theo
  • Moehrle, Martin G.

Abstract

In the innovation dynamics theory one distinguishes between product and process innovations within a technology, showing the different dynamics of each innovation type over time. In our paper, we operationalize product and process innovations as specific claim categories of patents, and also develop a semantic categorization of patent claims into product and process claims. For testing our approach we select ten technologies with similar characteristics from the field of storage technologies and present a panel data analysis, so that we cannot only provide empirical insights into their dynamics, but are also able to link the time series to the phases described by the theory. We are able to specify the time lag between product and process claims in a statistically significant manner. Furthermore, we expand the hitherto existing theory by demonstrating that, as they are required for even the earliest product innovations, effectiveness-oriented process innovations are introduced in the early stages of a technology beside lagged efficiency-oriented process innovations with a focus on cost reduction. Our method provides researchers with a new possibility to assess and forecast innovation dynamics; it also enables managers to obtain early information about a technology.

Suggested Citation

  • Wittfoth, Sven & Berger, Theo & Moehrle, Martin G., 2022. "Revisiting the innovation dynamics theory: How effectiveness- and efficiency-oriented process innovations accompany product innovations," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:112:y:2022:i:c:s0166497221001917
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102410
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497221001917
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102410?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rezaeian, M. & Montazeri, H. & Loonen, R.C.G.M., 2017. "Science foresight using life-cycle analysis, text mining and clustering: A case study on natural ventilation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 270-280.
    2. Utterback, James M & Abernathy, William J, 1975. "A dynamic model of process and product innovation," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 3(6), pages 639-656, December.
    3. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    4. Berg, S. & Wustmans, M. & Bröring, S., 2019. "Identifying first signals of emerging dominance in a technological innovation system: A novel approach based on patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 706-722.
    5. Clayton M. Christensen & Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1998. "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages 207-220, December.
    6. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    7. Mokyr, Joel, 1990. "Punctuated Equilibria and Technological Progress," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 350-354, May.
    8. Richard C. Levin & Peter C. Reiss, 1989. "Cost-Reducing and Demand-Creating R&D With Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 2876, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Utterback, James M. & Suarez, Fernando F., 1993. "Innovation, competition, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-21, February.
    10. Ashish Arora & Marco Ceccagnoli, 2006. "Patent Protection, Complementary Assets, and Firms' Incentives for Technology Licensing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(2), pages 293-308, February.
    11. Alfredo J. Mauri & G. Steven Mcmillan, 1999. "The Influence Of Technology On Strategic Alliances: An Application Of The Utterback And Abernathy Model Of Product And Process Innovation," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 3(04), pages 367-378.
    12. Hall, Bronwyn H. & MacGarvie, Megan, 2010. "The private value of software patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 994-1009, September.
    13. Jürgen Mihm & Fabian J. Sting & Tan Wang, 2015. "On the Effectiveness of Patenting Strategies in Innovation Races," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(11), pages 2662-2684, November.
    14. Linda F. Tegarden & Ann E. Echols & Donald E. Hatfield, 2000. "The Value of Patience and Start-up Firms: A Re-Examination of Entry Timing for Emerging Markets," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 24(4), pages 41-58, July.
    15. Binz, Christian & Tang, Tian & Huenteler, Joern, 2017. "Spatial lifecycles of cleantech industries – The global development history of solar photovoltaics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 386-402.
    16. Joshua S. Gans & Michael Kearney & Erin L. Scott & Scott Stern, 2021. "Choosing Technology: An Entrepreneurial Strategy Approach," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 39-53, March.
    17. Koberg, Christine S. & Uhlenbruck, Nikolaus & Sarason, Yolanda, 1996. "Facilitators of organizational innovation: The role of life-cycle stage," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 133-149, March.
    18. Huenteler, Joern & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Ossenbrink, Jan & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "Technology life-cycles in the energy sector — Technological characteristics and the role of deployment for innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 102-121.
    19. Ninan, Sunitha & Sharma, Arpita, 2006. "Cross-sectional analysis of patents in Indian fisheries sector," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 147-158, June.
    20. Lunn, John E, 1986. "An Empirical Analysis of Process and Product Patenting: A Simultaneous Equation Framework," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 319-330, March.
    21. Huenteler, Joern & Ossenbrink, Jan & Schmidt, Tobias S. & Hoffmann, Volker H., 2016. "How a product’s design hierarchy shapes the evolution of technological knowledge—Evidence from patent-citation networks in wind power," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1195-1217.
    22. Tian Heong Chan & Jürgen Mihm & Manuel E. Sosa, 2018. "On Styles in Product Design: An Analysis of U.S. Design Patents," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(3), pages 1230-1249, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Na Zhang & Chao Sun & Min Xu & Xuemei Wang & Jia Deng, 2023. "Catching Up of Latecomer Economies in ICT for Sustainable Development: An Analysis Based on Technology Life Cycle Using Patent Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-29, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hipp, Ann & Binz, Christian, 2020. "Firm survival in complex value chains and global innovation systems: Evidence from solar photovoltaics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(1).
    2. Malhotra, Abhishek & Zhang, Huiting & Beuse, Martin & Schmidt, Tobias, 2021. "How do new use environments influence a technology's knowledge trajectory? A patent citation network analysis of lithium-ion battery technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    3. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.
    4. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    5. Uzunca, Bilgehan & Sharapov, Dmitry & Tee, Richard, 2022. "Governance rigidity, industry evolution, and value capture in platform ecosystems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(7).
    6. Mahka Moeen & Rajshree Agarwal & Sonali K. Shah, 2020. "Building Industries by Building Knowledge: Uncertainty Reduction over Industry Milestones," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 218-244, September.
    7. Li, Xu, 2023. "When firms may benefit from sticking with an old technology," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 120131, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    8. Lee, Gwendolyn K., 2009. "Understanding the timing of 'fast-second' entry and the relevance of capabilities in invention vs. commercialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 86-95, February.
    9. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow & Jack A. Nickerson, 2015. "Dominant designs, innovation shocks, and the follower's dilemma," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 216-234, February.
    10. Binz, Christian & Truffer, Bernhard, 2017. "Global Innovation Systems—A conceptual framework for innovation dynamics in transnational contexts," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1284-1298.
    11. Huang, Shihping Kevin, 2014. "The emergence of the outsourcing market and product technological performance," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 132-139.
    12. Uwe Cantner & Simone Vannuccini, 2012. "A New View of General Purpose Technologies," Jena Economics Research Papers 2012-054, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    13. Banholzer, Nicolas & Behrens, Vanessa & Feuerriegel, Stefan & Heinrich, Sebastian & Rammer, Christian & Schmoch, Ulrich & Seliger, Florian & Wörter, Martin, 2019. "Knowledge spillovers from product and process inventions in patents and their impact on firm performance. End report," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 222367.
    14. Sun, Bixuan & Kolesnikov, Sergey & Goldstein, Anna & Chan, Gabriel, 2021. "A dynamic approach for identifying technological breakthroughs with an application in solar photovoltaics," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    15. Kim, Bongsun & Kim, Eonsoo & Miller, Douglas J. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2016. "The impact of the timing of patents on innovation performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 914-928.
    16. Ivan Lugovoi & Dimitrios A. Andritsos & Claire Senot, 2022. "Novelty and scope of process innovation: The role of related and unrelated manufacturing experience," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 31(10), pages 3877-3895, October.
    17. Peng Huang & Marco Ceccagnoli & Chris Forman & D. J. Wu, 2013. "Appropriability Mechanisms and the Platform Partnership Decision: Evidence from Enterprise Software," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 102-121, July.
    18. Bonaccorsi, Andrea & Giuri, Paola, 2000. "When shakeout doesn't occur: The evolution of the turboprop engine industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 847-870, August.
    19. Na Zhang & Chao Sun & Min Xu & Xuemei Wang & Jia Deng, 2023. "Catching Up of Latecomer Economies in ICT for Sustainable Development: An Analysis Based on Technology Life Cycle Using Patent Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-29, June.
    20. Narayanan, V.K. & Chen, Tianxu, 2012. "Research on technology standards: Accomplishment and challenges," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1375-1406.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:112:y:2022:i:c:s0166497221001917. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.