IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v124y2023ics0166497223000743.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Big data as an exploration trigger or problem-solving patch: Design and integration of AI-embedded systems in the automotive industry

Author

Listed:
  • Plantec, Quentin
  • Deval, Marie-Alix
  • Hooge, Sophie
  • Weil, Benoit

Abstract

In traditional industries, such as the automotive industry, incumbents must draw on big data and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies by designing AI-embedded systems integrated into their end products. While such systems are predominantly presented as paving the way for new knowledge explorative approaches, traditional industry incumbents may face challenges integrating such disruptive technology in their optimized new product development processes. Hence, this study investigates the extent to which incumbents innovate through the design of AI-embedded systems—either via explorative or exploitative strategies—by focusing on the case of the automotive industry. It employed a sequential explanatory mixed-method design and a knowledge search theoretical framework. A quantitative analysis of 46,145 patents from the top 19 traditional companies to identify AI and non-AI patents revealed that firms primarily rely on knowledge exploitation when designing and integrating AI-embedded systems, surprisingly fostering innovativeness. Complementary qualitative insights reveal that big data and AI technologies are integrated into the industrialization phase of new vehicle development, per a creative problem-solving patch. Notably, this study's findings reveal the technical and organizational challenges limiting data-driven innovation, thereby paving a way for more technologically original innovation with big data and AI.

Suggested Citation

  • Plantec, Quentin & Deval, Marie-Alix & Hooge, Sophie & Weil, Benoit, 2023. "Big data as an exploration trigger or problem-solving patch: Design and integration of AI-embedded systems in the automotive industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:124:y:2023:i:c:s0166497223000743
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102763
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497223000743
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2023.102763?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. Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil & Armand Hatchuel, 2017. "Design Theory - Methods and Organization for Innovation," Post-Print hal-01481877, HAL.
    2. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    3. Jarrahi, Mohammad Hossein, 2018. "Artificial intelligence and the future of work: Human-AI symbiosis in organizational decision making," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 61(4), pages 577-586.
    4. Plantec, Quentin & Le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoît, 2021. "Impact of knowledge search practices on the originality of inventions: A study in the oil & gas industry through dynamic patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    5. Llopis-Albert, Carlos & Rubio, Francisco & Valero, Francisco, 2021. "Impact of digital transformation on the automotive industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    6. Konstantinos Grigoriou & Frank T. Rothaermel, 2017. "Organizing for knowledge generation: internal knowledge networks and the contingent effect of external knowledge sourcing," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(2), pages 395-414, February.
    7. Keding, Christoph & Meissner, Philip, 2021. "Managerial overreliance on AI-augmented decision-making processes: How the use of AI-based advisory systems shapes choice behavior in R&D investment decisions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    8. Strumsky, Deborah & Lobo, José, 2015. "Identifying the sources of technological novelty in the process of invention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1445-1461.
    9. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    10. Segrestin, Blanche, 2005. "Partnering to explore: The Renault-Nissan Alliance as a forerunner of new cooperative patterns," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 657-672, June.
    11. Quentin Plantec & Pascal Le Masson & Benoît Weil, 2021. "Impact of knowledge search practices on the originality of inventions: A study in the oil & gas industry through dynamic patent analysis," Post-Print halshs-03203124, HAL.
    12. Robert M. Grant, 1996. "Prospering in Dynamically-Competitive Environments: Organizational Capability as Knowledge Integration," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 375-387, August.
    13. Theodoros A. Skouras & Panagiotis K. Gkonis & Charalampos N. Ilias & Panagiotis T. Trakadas & Eleftherios G. Tsampasis & Theodore V. Zahariadis, 2019. "Electrical Vehicles: Current State of the Art, Future Challenges, and Perspectives," Clean Technol., MDPI, vol. 2(1), pages 1-16, December.
    14. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    15. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Wang, Jian, 2019. "Scientific novelty and technological impact," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(6), pages 1362-1372.
    16. 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).
    17. Nooteboom, Bart & Van Haverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & Gilsing, Victor & van den Oord, Ad, 2007. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1016-1034, September.
    18. Madeline K. Kneeland & Melissa A. Schilling & Barak S. Aharonson, 2020. "Exploring Uncharted Territory: Knowledge Search Processes in the Origination of Outlier Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 535-557, May.
    19. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    20. Jeff Alstott & Giorgio Triulzi & Bowen Yan & Jianxi Luo, 2017. "Mapping technology space by normalizing patent networks," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 443-479, January.
    21. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    22. Jaffe, Adam B, 1986. "Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits, and Market Value," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 76(5), pages 984-1001, December.
    23. Ho, Yuen-Ping & Ruan, Yi & Hang, Chang-Chieh & Wong, Poh-Kam, 2016. "Technology upgrading of Small-and-Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs) through a manpower secondment strategy – A mixed-methods study of Singapore's T-Up program," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 57, pages 21-29.
    24. Sestino, Andrea & Prete, Maria Irene & Piper, Luigi & Guido, Gianluigi, 2020. "Internet of Things and Big Data as enablers for business digitalization strategies," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    25. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    26. Thomas Gillier & Gérald Piat & Benoît Roussel & Patrick Truchot, 2010. "Managing Innovation Fields in a Cross-Industry Exploratory Partnership with C-K Design Theory," Post-Print hal-00586603, HAL.
    27. Johnson, Prince Chacko & Laurell, Christofer & Ots, Mart & Sandström, Christian, 2022. "Digital innovation and the effects of artificial intelligence on firms’ research and development – Automation or augmentation, exploration or exploitation?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    28. Skeete, Jean-Paul, 2018. "Level 5 autonomy: The new face of disruption in road transport," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 134(C), pages 22-34.
    29. Mosterd, Lars & Sobota, Vladimir C.M. & van de Kaa, Geerten & Ding, Aaron Yi & de Reuver, Mark, 2021. "Context dependent trade-offs around platform-to-platform openness: The case of the Internet of Things," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 108(C).
    30. Marie-Alix Deval & Sophie Hooge & Benoit Weil, 2020. "Identification and exploitation of new design paths by breakthrough innovation experts in a generative design partnership," Post-Print hal-02484707, HAL.
    31. Patrick Mikalef & John Krogstie, 2020. "Examining the interplay between big data analytics and contextual factors in driving process innovation capabilities," European Journal of Information Systems, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(3), pages 260-287, May.
    32. Thomas Gillier & Sophie Hooge & Gérald Piat, 2015. "Framing value management for creative projects: An expansive perspective," Grenoble Ecole de Management (Post-Print) hal-01134251, HAL.
    33. Trocin, Cristina & Hovland, Ingrid Våge & Mikalef, Patrick & Dremel, Christian, 2021. "How Artificial Intelligence affords digital innovation: A cross-case analysis of Scandinavian companies," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    34. Wheelwright, Steven C. & Clark, Kim B., 1992. "Competing through development capability in a manufacturing-based organization," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 29-43.
    35. Dahlin, Kristina B. & Behrens, Dean M., 2005. "When is an invention really radical?: Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 717-737, June.
    36. Leyer, Michael & Schneider, Sabrina, 2021. "Decision augmentation and automation with artificial intelligence: Threat or opportunity for managers?," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 64(5), pages 711-724.
    37. Lee Fleming & Olav Sorenson, 2004. "Science as a map in technological search," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 25(8‐9), pages 909-928, August.
    38. Di Vaio, Assunta & Palladino, Rosa & Hassan, Rohail & Escobar, Octavio, 2020. "Artificial intelligence and business models in the sustainable development goals perspective: A systematic literature review," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 283-314.
    39. Catalina Martínez, 2011. "Patent families: When do different definitions really matter?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 86(1), pages 39-63, January.
    40. Kristina Dahlin & Deans M. Behrens, 2005. "When is an invention really radical? Defining and measuring technological radicalness," Post-Print hal-00480416, HAL.
    41. José Lobo & Deborah Strumsky, 2019. "Sources of inventive novelty: two patent classification schemas, same story," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 19-37, July.
    42. Wells, Peter & Wang, Xiaobei & Wang, Liqiao & Liu, Haokun & Orsato, Renato, 2020. "More friends than foes? The impact of automobility-as-a-service on the incumbent automotive industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    43. Sai Yayavaram & Wei-Ru Chen, 2015. "Changes in firm knowledge couplings and firm innovation performance: The moderating role of technological complexity," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(3), pages 377-396, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Plantec, Quentin & Le Masson, Pascal & Weil, Benoît, 2021. "Impact of knowledge search practices on the originality of inventions: A study in the oil & gas industry through dynamic patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    2. Quentin Plantec & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2020. "Impact of knowledge search practices on the originality of inventions: a study in the oil & gas industry," Post-Print hal-02613665, HAL.
    3. Qu, Guannan & Chen, Jin & Zhang, Ruhao & Wang, Luyao & Yang, Yayu, 2023. "Technological search strategy and breakthrough innovation: An integrated approach based on main-path analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 196(C).
    4. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara DiGuardo, 2017. "Sustainability of patent-based competitive advantage in the U.S. communications services industry," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(6), pages 1334-1361, December.
    5. Kok, Holmer & Faems, Dries & de Faria, Pedro, 2020. "Ties that matter: The impact of alliance partner knowledge recombination novelty on knowledge utilization in R&D alliances," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    6. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    7. Leone, Maria Isabella & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio & Natalicchio, Angelo, 2022. "Boundary spanning through external technology acquisition: The moderating role of star scientists and upstream alliances," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    8. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    9. William Arant & Dirk Fornahl & Nils Grashof & Kolja Hesse & Cathrin Söllner, 2019. "University-industry collaborations—The key to radical innovations? [Universität-Industrie-Kooperationen – Der Schlüssel zu radikalen Innovationen?]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 39(2), pages 119-141, October.
    10. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/43aq8ffdqb82sbffkv69bt1eaa is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Dirk Fornahl & Nils Grashof & Alexander Kopka, 2021. "Do not neglect the periphery?! - the emergence and diffusion of radical innovations," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2102, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    12. Ron Boschma & Ernest Miguelez & Rosina Moreno & Diego B. Ocampo-Corrales, 2021. "Technological breakthroughs in European regions: the role of related and unrelated combinations," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2118, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2021.
    13. Sajad Ashouri & Anne-Laure Mention & Kosmas X. Smyrnios, 2021. "Anticipation and analysis of industry convergence using patent-level indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5727-5758, July.
    14. Cammarano, Antonello & Michelino, Francesca & Lamberti, Emilia & Caputo, Mauro, 2017. "Accumulated stock of knowledge and current search practices: The impact on patent quality," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 204-222.
    15. Pezzoni, Michele & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Visentin, Fabiana, 2022. "How fast is this novel technology going to be a hit? Antecedents predicting follow-on inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    16. Schön, Benjamin & Pyka, Andreas, 2013. "The success factors of technology-sourcing through mergers & acquisitions: An intuitive meta-analysis," FZID Discussion Papers 78-2013, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    17. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Elona Marku, 2018. "Patent value and the Tobin’s q ratio in media services," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(1), pages 1-19, February.
    18. John C. Eklund, 2022. "The knowledge‐incentive tradeoff: Understanding the relationship between research and development decentralization and innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(12), pages 2478-2509, December.
    19. Nils Grashof & Alexander Kopka, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and radical innovation: an opportunity for all companies?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 771-797, August.
    20. Enkel, Ellen & Heil, Sebastian & Hengstler, Monika & Wirth, Henning, 2017. "Exploratory and exploitative innovation: To what extent do the dimensions of individual level absorptive capacity contribute?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 60, pages 29-38.
    21. Corradini, Carlo & De Propris, Lisa, 2017. "Beyond local search: Bridging platforms and inter-sectoral technological integration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 196-206.

    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:124:y:2023:i:c:s0166497223000743. 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.