IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/ifwkwp/2097.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Is necessity the mother of disruption?

Author

Listed:
  • Preißner, Stephanie
  • Raasch, Christina
  • Schweisfurth, Tim

Abstract

This study investigates the origins of disruptive innovation. According to the canonical model, disruptive innovations do not originate from existing customers - in contrast with what the user innovation literature would predict. We compiled a unique historical and content-analytic dataset based on 62 cases identified from the disruptive innovation literature. We found that 44% of the disruptive innovations in this sample were originally developed by users. Disruptive innovations are more likely to originate from users (producers) if the environment is characterized by high levels of turbulence in customer preferences (technology). Disruptive innovations involving high functional (technological) novelty, tend to be developed by users (producers). Users are also more likely to be the source of disruptive process innovations, and to innovate in weaker appropriability environments. Our paper is among the first to link the disruptive and user innovation literatures. We contribute to both and offer guidance to managers on the likely source of disruptive threats.

Suggested Citation

  • Preißner, Stephanie & Raasch, Christina & Schweisfurth, Tim, 2017. "Is necessity the mother of disruption?," Kiel Working Papers 2097, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:ifwkwp:2097
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/172535/1/1009636154.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Markus Reitzig & Phanish Puranam, 2009. "Value appropriation as an organizational capability: the case of IP protection through patents," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(7), pages 765-789, July.
    2. Baldwin, Carliss & Hienerth, Christoph & von Hippel, Eric, 2006. "How user innovations become commercial products: A theoretical investigation and case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1291-1313, November.
    3. Carliss Y. Baldwin & Kim B. Clark, 2006. "The Architecture of Participation: Does Code Architecture Mitigate Free Riding in the Open Source Development Model?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1116-1127, July.
    4. Peter N. Golder & Rachel Shacham & Debanjan Mitra, 2009. "—Innovations' Origins: When, By Whom, and How Are Radical Innovations Developed?," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(1), pages 166-179, 01-02.
    5. Peter B. Meyer, 2003. "Episodes of Collective Invention," Working Papers 368, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    6. Nelson, Richard R. & Winter, Sidney G., 1993. "In search of useful theory of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 108-108, April.
    7. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira Fabrizio, 2012. "How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 971-987, August.
    9. Christensen, Clayton M. & Rosenbloom, Richard S., 1995. "Explaining the attacker's advantage: Technological paradigms, organizational dynamics, and the value network," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 233-257, March.
    10. Klenner, Philipp & Hüsig, Stefan & Dowling, Michael, 2013. "Ex-ante evaluation of disruptive susceptibility in established value networks—When are markets ready for disruptive innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 914-927.
    11. Stock, Ruth & Oliveira, Pedro & Hippel, Eric von, 2015. "Impacts of the Hedonic and Utilitarian User Motives on the Innovativeness of User-Developed Solutions," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 77349, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    12. Michael Song & Cornelia Droge & Sangphet Hanvanich & Roger Calantone, 2005. "Marketing and technology resource complementarity: an analysis of their interaction effect in two environmental contexts," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 259-276, March.
    13. Stock, Ruth & Oliveira, Pedro & Hippel, Eric von, 2015. "Impacts of the Hedonic and Utilitarian User Motives on the Innovativeness of User-Developed Solutions," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 71022, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    14. Henk W. Volberda & Niels van der Weerdt & Ernst Verwaal & Marten Stienstra & Antonio J. Verdu, 2012. "Contingency Fit, Institutional Fit, and Firm Performance: A Metafit Approach to Organization–Environment Relationships," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 1040-1054, August.
    15. Glen L. Urban & Eric von Hippel, 1988. "Lead User Analyses for the Development of New Industrial Products," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 34(5), pages 569-582, May.
    16. Linus Dahlander & Maureen Mckelvey, 2005. "Who is not developing open source software? non-users, users, and developers," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(7), pages 617-635.
    17. Eric von Hippel & Jeroen P. J. de Jong & Stephen Flowers, 2012. "Comparing Business and Household Sector Innovation in Consumer Products: Findings from a Representative Study in the United Kingdom," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(9), pages 1669-1681, September.
    18. Stock, Ruth & Oliveira, Pedro & Hippel, Eric von, 2015. "Impacts of the Hedonic and Utilitarian User Motives on the Innovativeness of User-Developed Solutions," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 71821, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    19. Gary L. Lilien & Pamela D. Morrison & Kathleen Searls & Mary Sonnack & Eric von Hippel, 2002. "Performance Assessment of the Lead User Idea-Generation Process for New Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1042-1059, August.
    20. Eric von Hippel & Georg von Krogh, 2003. "Open Source Software and the “Private-Collective” Innovation Model: Issues for Organization Science," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 14(2), pages 209-223, April.
    21. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    22. Luthje, Christian & Herstatt, Cornelius & von Hippel, Eric, 2005. "User-innovators and "local" information: The case of mountain biking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 951-965, August.
    23. von Hippel, Eric, 1976. "The dominant role of users in the scientific instrument innovation process," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 212-239, July.
    24. Hienerth, Christoph & von Hippel, Eric & Berg Jensen, Morten, 2014. "User community vs. producer innovation development efficiency: A first empirical study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 190-201.
    25. Eric von Hippel, 2007. "Horizontal innovation networks—by and for users," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 16(2), pages 293-315, April.
    26. Alfonso Gambardella & Christina Raasch & Eric von Hippel, 2017. "The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1450-1468, May.
    27. Nelson, Richard R & Winter, Sidney G, 1973. "Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Economic Capabilities," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 63(2), pages 440-449, May.
    28. Shantanu Bhattacharya & V. Krishnan & Vijay Mahajan, 1998. "Managing New Product Definition in Highly Dynamic Environments," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-2), pages 50-64, November.
    29. Henkel, Joachim, 2006. "Selective revealing in open innovation processes: The case of embedded Linux," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 953-969, September.
    30. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    31. Bergek, Anna & Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Hobday, Michael, 2013. "Technological discontinuities and the challenge for incumbent firms: Destruction, disruption or creative accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1210-1224.
    32. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & von Hippel, Eric, 2009. "Transfers of user process innovations to process equipment producers: A study of Dutch high-tech firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(7), pages 1181-1191, September.
    33. Pamela D. Morrison & John H. Roberts & Eric von Hippel, 2000. "Determinants of User Innovation and Innovation Sharing in a Local Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(12), pages 1513-1527, December.
    34. G. Tomas M. Hult & David J. Ketchen, 2001. "Does market orientation matter?: a test of the relationship between positional advantage and performance," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(9), pages 899-906, September.
    35. Ogawa, Susumu, 1998. "Does sticky information affect the locus of innovation? Evidence from the Japanese convenience-store industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 777-790, April.
    36. Harhoff, Dietmar & Henkel, Joachim & von Hippel, Eric, 2003. "Profiting from voluntary information spillovers: how users benefit by freely revealing their innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 1753-1769, December.
    37. Henk W. Volberda, 1996. "Toward the Flexible Form: How to Remain Vital in Hypercompetitive Environments," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 7(4), pages 359-374, August.
    38. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    39. Christina Raasch & Cornelius Herstatt & Phillip Lock, 2010. "The Dynamics Of User Innovation: Drivers And Impediments Of Innovation Activities," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Stephen Flowers & Flis Henwood (ed.), Perspectives On User Innovation, chapter 3, pages 35-56, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    40. Riggs, William & von Hippel, Eric, 1994. "Incentives to innovate and the sources of innovation: the case of scientific instruments," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(4), pages 459-469, July.
    41. Christensen, Clayton M., 1993. "The Rigid Disk Drive Industry: A History of Commercial and Technological Turbulence," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 67(4), pages 531-588, January.
    42. Stock, Ruth & Oliveira, Pedro & Hippel, Eric von, 2015. "Impacts of the Hedonic and Utilitarian User Motives on the Innovativeness of User-Developed Solutions," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 76764, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    43. Stanley F. Slater & Eric M. Olson, 2001. "Marketing's contribution to the implementation of business strategy: an empirical analysis," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(11), pages 1055-1067, November.
    44. Lettl, Christoph & Herstatt, Cornelius & Gemuenden, H-G., 2004. "Learning from users for radical innovation," Working Papers 27, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    45. Von Hippel, Eric, 1982. "Appropriability of innovation benefit as a predictor of the source of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 95-115, April.
    46. Joel L. Horowitz & N. E. Savin, 2001. "Binary Response Models: Logits, Probits and Semiparametrics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 43-56, Fall.
    47. Nishikawa, Hidehiko & Schreier, Martin & Ogawa, Susumu, 2013. "User-generated versus designer-generated products: A performance assessment at Muji," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 160-167.
    48. G. Tomas M. Hult & David J. Ketchen & Stanley F. Slater, 2005. "Market orientation and performance: an integration of disparate approaches," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(12), pages 1173-1181, December.
    49. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & von Hippel, Eric & Gault, Fred & Kuusisto, Jari & Raasch, Christina, 2015. "Market failure in the diffusion of consumer-developed innovations: Patterns in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1856-1865.
    50. Roy, Raja & Cohen, Susan K., 2015. "Disruption in the US machine tool industry: The role of inhouse users and pre-disruption component experience in firm response," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1555-1565.
    51. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Raasch, Christina, 2015. "Embedded lead users—The benefits of employing users for corporate innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 168-180.
    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. Lukoschek, Carmen Sabrina & Stock-Homburg, Ruth Maria, 2021. "Integrating Home and Work: How the Work Environment Enhances Household-Sector Innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).

    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. Carliss Baldwin & Eric von Hippel, 2011. "Modeling a Paradigm Shift: From Producer Innovation to User and Open Collaborative Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(6), pages 1399-1417, December.
    2. Svensson, Peter O. & Hartmann, Rasmus Koss, 2018. "Policies to promote user innovation: Makerspaces and clinician innovation in Swedish hospitals," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 277-288.
    3. Pollok, Patrick & Amft, André & Diener, Kathleen & Lüttgens, Dirk & Piller, Frank T., 2021. "Knowledge diversity and team creativity: How hobbyists beat professional designers in creating novel board games," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    4. Alfonso Gambardella & Christina Raasch & Eric von Hippel, 2017. "The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1450-1468, May.
    5. Rivieccio, Giorgia & Raïes, Karine & Schiavone, Francesco, 2023. "Are you attractive enough? An empirical analysis on user innovators' characteristics and the creation of new social ventures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    6. Maria Roszkowska-Menkes, 2017. "User Innovation: State of the Art and Perspectives for Future Research," Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation, Fundacja Upowszechniająca Wiedzę i Naukę "Cognitione", vol. 13(2), pages 127-154.
    7. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Dharmawan, Magha P., 2019. "Does lead userness foster idea implementation and diffusion? A study of internal shopfloor users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 289-297.
    8. Schweisfurth, Tim G., 2017. "Comparing internal and external lead users as sources of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 238-248.
    9. Wu, Chia-huei & de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Raasch, Christina & Poldervaart, Sabrine, 2020. "Work process-related lead userness as an antecedent of innovative behavior and user innovation in organizations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(6).
    10. Ghasemzadeh, Khatereh & Bortoluzzi, Guido & Yordanova, Zornitsa, 2022. "Collaborating with users to innovate: A systematic literature review," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    11. Block, Jörn H. & Henkel, Joachim & Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Stiegler, Annika, 2016. "Commercializing user innovations by vertical diversification: The user–manufacturer innovator," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 244-259.
    12. Jeroen de Jong & Eric von Hippel, 2010. "Open, distributed and user-centered: Towards a paradigm shift in innovation policy," Scales Research Reports H201009, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    13. Göldner, Moritz & Herstatt, Cornelius & Canhão, Helena & Oliveira, Pedro, 2019. "User entrepreneurs for social innovation: The case of patients and caregivers as developers of tangible medical devices," Working Papers 108, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    14. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Raasch, Christina, 2015. "Embedded lead users—The benefits of employing users for corporate innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(1), pages 168-180.
    15. Wu, Chia-huei & de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Raasch, Christina & Poldervaart, Sabrine, 2020. "Work process-related lead userness as an antecedent of innovative behavior and user innovation in organizations," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 228657, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    16. Sánchez-González, Gloria & González-Álvarez, Nuria & Nieto, Mariano, 2009. "Sticky information and heterogeneous needs as determining factors of R&D cooperation with customers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1590-1603, December.
    17. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira Fabrizio, 2012. "How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 971-987, August.
    18. Konstantin Fursov & Thomas Thurner, 2016. "God Helps Those Who Help Themselves! A Study of User-Innovation in Russia," HSE Working papers WP BRP 59/STI/2016, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    19. Ebbing, Tobias & Lüthje, Christian, 2021. "Pricing decisions of consumer innovators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    20. Fursov, Konstantin & Thurner, Thomas & Nefedova, Alena, 2017. "What user-innovators do that others don't: A study of daily practices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 153-160.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    user innovation; disruptive innovation; market orientation; radical innovation; environmental turbulence;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness
    • L17 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Open Source Products and Markets
    • M19 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Other
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:zbw:ifwkwp:2097. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iwkiede.html .

    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.