IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

The roles of product lead-users and product experts in new product evaluation

  • Ozer, Muammer
Registered author(s):

    It is widely recognized in the literature that product innovation is one of the most important research policy issues. As an important product innovation activity, evaluating the market potentials of a new product has also received a great deal of attention in the literature because of its importance to companies as well as to both governmental and non-governmental research institutions. Extending earlier research about product lead-users and product experts and addressing several methodological issues identified in the literature, this study focuses on the roles of product lead-users and product experts in new product evaluation. In particular, the results of a longitudinal empirical study show that there are theoretical and empirical distinctions between product lead-users and product experts with respect to the accuracy of new product evaluations and that it is possible for companies as well as governmental and non-governmental agencies to improve significantly the accuracy of such evaluations.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Research Policy.

    Volume (Year): 38 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 8 (October)
    Pages: 1340-1349

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:38:y:2009:i:8:p:1340-1349
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Schmickl, Christina & Kieser, Alfred, 2008. "How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(6-7), pages 1148-1163, July.
    2. Simonson, Itamar & Huber, Joel & Payne, John, 1988. " The Relationship between Prior Brand Knowledge and Information Acquisition Order," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(4), pages 566-78, March.
    3. Hoegl, Martin & Gibbert, Michael & Mazursky, David, 2008. "Financial constraints in innovation projects: When is less more?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1382-1391, September.
    4. Coltman, Tim & Devinney, Timothy M. & Midgley, David F. & Venaik, Sunil, 2008. "Formative versus reflective measurement models: Two applications of formative measurement," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(12), pages 1250-1262, December.
    5. Jarvis, Cheryl Burke & MacKenzie, Scott B & Podsakoff, Philip M, 2003. " A Critical Review of Construct Indicators and Measurement Model Misspecification in Marketing and Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 30(2), pages 199-218, September.
    6. M. Antioco & R.K. Moenaert & A. Lindgreen, 2008. "Reducing on going product design decision-making bias," Post-Print hal-00323010, HAL.
    7. Amara, Nabil & Landry, Réjean & Traoré, Namatié, 2008. "Managing the protection of innovations in knowledge-intensive business services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1530-1547, October.
    8. Park, C Whan & Mothersbaugh, David L & Feick, Lawrence, 1994. " Consumer Knowledge Assessment," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 71-82, June.
    9. 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.
    10. Morrison, Pamela D. & Roberts, John H. & Midgley, David F., 2004. "The nature of lead users and measurement of leading edge status," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 351-362, March.
    11. Koellinger, Ph.D., 2008. "The Relationship between Technology, Innovation, and Firm Performance: Empirical Evidence on E-Business in Europe," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-031-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    12. Koellinger, Philipp, 2008. "The relationship between technology, innovation, and firm performance--Empirical evidence from e-business in Europe," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1317-1328, September.
    13. Schmickl, Christina & Kieser, Alfred, 2008. "How much do specialists have to learn from each other when they jointly develop radical product innovations?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 473-491, April.
    14. von Wartburg, Iwan & Teichert, Thorsten & Rost, Katja, 2005. "Inventive progress measured by multi-stage patent citation analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(10), pages 1591-1607, December.
    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. Harrison, Debbie & Waluszewski, Alexandra, 2008. "The development of a user network as a way to re-launch an unwanted product," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 115-130, February.
    17. Schulze, Anja & Hoegl, Martin, 2008. "Organizational knowledge creation and the generation of new product ideas: A behavioral approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1742-1750, December.
    18. Dolfsma, Wilfred & van der Panne, Gerben, 2008. "Currents and sub-currents in innovation flows: Explaining innovativeness using new-product announcements," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1706-1716, December.
    19. Morwitz, Vicki G & Johnson, Eric J & Schmittlein, David C, 1993. " Does Measuring Intent Change Behavior?," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 46-61, June.
    20. Cai, Jing & Tylecote, Andrew, 2008. "Corporate governance and technological dynamism of Chinese firms in mobile telecommunications: A quantitative study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1790-1811, December.
    21. Ozer, Muammer, 2007. "Reducing the demand uncertainties at the fuzzy-front-end of developing new online services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1372-1387, November.
    22. Harabi, Najib, 1994. "Appropriability of Technical Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," MPRA Paper 26267, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    23. Bergek, Anna & Jacobsson, Staffan & Carlsson, Bo & Lindmark, Sven & Rickne, Annika, 2008. "Analyzing the functional dynamics of technological innovation systems: A scheme of analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 407-429, April.
    24. Manley, Karen, 2008. "Against the odds: Small firms in Australia successfully introducing new technology on construction projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1751-1764, December.
    25. Petty, Richard E & Cacioppo, John T & Schumann, David, 1983. " Central and Peripheral Routes to Advertising Effectiveness: The Moderating Role of Involvement," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 10(2), pages 135-46, September.
    26. Robert L. Winkler & Roy M. Poses, 1993. "Evaluating and Combining Physicians' Probabilities of Survival in an Intensive Care Unit," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(12), pages 1526-1543, December.
    27. Kratzer, J. & Gemuenden, Hans G. & Lettl, Christopher, 2008. "Revealing dynamics and consequences of fit and misfit between formal and informal networks in multi-institutional product development collaborations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1356-1370, September.
    28. Skuras, Dimitris & Tsegenidi, Kyriaki & Tsekouras, Kostas, 2008. "Product innovation and the decision to invest in fixed capital assets: Evidence from an SME survey in six European Union member states," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1778-1789, December.
    29. Alba, Joseph W & Hutchinson, J Wesley, 1987. " Dimensions of Consumer Expertise," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(4), pages 411-54, March.
    30. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    31. 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.
    32. Robert C. Blattberg & Stephen J. Hoch, 1990. "Database Models and Managerial Intuition: 50% Model + 50% Manager," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(8), pages 887-899, August.
    33. Storz, Cornelia, 2008. "Dynamics in innovation systems: Evidence from Japan's game software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1480-1491, October.
    34. Tether, Bruce S. & Tajar, Abdelouahid, 2008. "The organisational-cooperation mode of innovation and its prominence amongst European service firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 720-739, May.
    35. Coenen, R., 1972. "The use of technological forecasts in government planning," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 156-172, April.
    36. Reekie, W. Duncan, 1982. "An assessment of the benefits of the diffusion of an innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 261-266, August.
    37. Bettman, James R & Park, C Whan, 1980. " Effects of Prior Knowledge and Experience and Phase of the Choice Process on Consumer Decision Processes: A Protocol Analysis," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(3), pages 234-48, December.
    38. Kleinmuntz, Don N. & Fennema, M. G. & Peecher, Mark E., 1996. "Conditioned Assessment of Subjective Probabilities: Identifying the Benefits of Decomposition," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 66(1), pages 1-15, April.
    39. Hoch, Stephen J, 1988. " Who Do We Know: Predicting the Interests and Opinions of the American Consumer," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 15(3), pages 315-24, December.
    40. Brucks, Merrie, 1985. " The Effects of Product Class Knowledge on Information Search Behavior," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 12(1), pages 1-16, June.
    41. Garud, Raghu & Munir, Kamal, 2008. "From transaction to transformation costs: The case of Polaroid's SX-70 camera," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 690-705, May.
    42. 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.
    43. 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.
    44. Bowns, Steven & Bradley, Ian & Knee, Paula & Williams, Fiona & Williams, Geoffrey, 2003. "Measuring the economic benefits from R&D: improvements in the MMI model of the United Kingdom National Measurement System," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(6), pages 991-1002, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:38:y:2009:i:8:p:1340-1349. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.