IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v54y2025i1s0048733324001562.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The process of framing innovation activities: How strategic leaders erode their ideas for radical innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Kratochvil, Renate

Abstract

Understanding what impedes and facilitates radical innovation is crucial. This study introduces a process perspective on managerial cognition into the strategic leadership literature to elucidate the dynamics that contribute to idea erosion during the development of radical innovation. Employing a framing perspective and utilizing longitudinal data from a single case, this study presents a process model of strategic leaders' framing-induced idea erosion. At the heart of this process are two dynamics. First is a dynamic consisting of the anticipation of innovation that fails to account for the necessary iterative process, leading to a growing mismatch between expectations and activities. Second is a dynamic consisting of cognitive processes, where strategic leaders frame this mismatch as a failure, this intensifying over time. This study shows that strategic leaders tend to favor incremental over radical innovation, not due to a shortage of ideas but because they frame their activities as failures.

Suggested Citation

  • Kratochvil, Renate, 2025. "The process of framing innovation activities: How strategic leaders erode their ideas for radical innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(1).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:1:s0048733324001562
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2024.105107
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733324001562
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2024.105107?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. Mary Tripsas & Giovanni Gavetti, 2000. "Capabilities, cognition, and inertia: evidence from digital imaging," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1147-1161, October.
    2. Aversa, Paolo & Guillotin, Olivier, 2018. "Firm technological responses to regulatory changes: A longitudinal study in the Le Mans Prototype racing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1655-1673.
    3. Saouré Kouamé & Ann Langley, 2018. "Relating microprocesses to macro‐outcomes in qualitative strategy process and practice research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 559-581, March.
    4. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    5. Kaplan, Sarah & Tripsas, Mary, 2008. "Thinking about technology: Applying a cognitive lens to technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(5), pages 790-805, June.
    6. Justin J. P. Jansen & Frans A. J. Van Den Bosch & Henk W. Volberda, 2006. "Exploratory Innovation, Exploitative Innovation, and Performance: Effects of Organizational Antecedents and Environmental Moderators," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(11), pages 1661-1674, November.
    7. Richard A. Bettis & C. K. Prahalad, 1995. "The dominant logic: Retrospective and extension," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(1), pages 5-14.
    8. Nadine Kammerlander & Andreas König & Melanie Richards, 2018. "Why Do Incumbents Respond Heterogeneously to Disruptive Innovations? The Interplay of Domain Identity and Role Identity," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1122-1165, November.
    9. Sucheta Nadkarni & Pamela S. Barr, 2008. "Environmental context, managerial cognition, and strategic action: an integrated view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(13), pages 1395-1427, December.
    10. Elco Burg & Hans Berends & Erik M. Raaij, 2014. "Framing and Interorganizational Knowledge Transfer: A Process Study of Collaborative Innovation in the Aircraft Industry," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(3), pages 349-378, May.
    11. Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari & Raghu Garud & Arun Kumaraswamy, 2016. "The disruptor's dilemma: TiVo and the U.S. television ecosystem," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(9), pages 1829-1853, September.
    12. Donald C. Hambrick, 1989. "Guest editor's introduction: Putting top managers back in the strategy picture," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 10(S1), pages 5-15, June.
    13. Markku V. J. Maula & Thomas Keil & Shaker A. Zahra, 2013. "Top Management’s Attention to Discontinuous Technological Change: Corporate Venture Capital as an Alert Mechanism," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 926-947, June.
    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. Kathleen M. Eisenhardt & Jeffrey A. Martin, 2000. "Dynamic capabilities: what are they?," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(10‐11), pages 1105-1121, October.
    16. Sarah Kaplan, 2011. "Research in Cognition and Strategy: Reflections on Two Decades of Progress and a Look to the Future," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(3), pages 665-695, May.
    17. Saerom Lee & Felipe A. Csaszar, 2020. "Cognitive and Structural Antecedents of Innovation: A Large-Sample Study," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 71-97, June.
    18. Anne-Laure Fayard & Emmanouil Gkeredakis & Natalia Levina, 2016. "Framing Innovation Opportunities While Staying Committed to an Organizational Epistemic Stance," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 302-323, June.
    19. J. P. Eggers & Sarah Kaplan, 2009. "Cognition and Renewal: Comparing CEO and Organizational Effects on Incumbent Adaptation to Technical Change," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 461-477, April.
    20. Simona Giorgi, 2017. "The Mind and Heart of Resonance: The Role of Cognition and Emotions in Frame Effectiveness," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 54(5), pages 711-738, July.
    21. Laura J. Kornish & Jeremy Hutchison‐Krupat, 2017. "Research on Idea Generation and Selection: Implications for Management of Technology," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 26(4), pages 633-651, April.
    22. Arun Kumaraswamy & Raghu Garud & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari, 2018. "Perspectives on Disruptive Innovations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1025-1042, November.
    23. Deborah Dougherty & Danielle D. Dunne, 2011. "Organizing Ecologies of Complex Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(5), pages 1214-1223, October.
    24. Theresa Langenmayr & David Seidl & Violetta Splitter, 2024. "Interdiscursive struggles: Managing the co‐existence of the conventional and open strategy discourse," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(9), pages 1696-1730, September.
    25. Sarah Kaplan, 2008. "Framing Contests: Strategy Making Under Uncertainty," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(5), pages 729-752, October.
    26. Juliane Reinecke & Shaz Ansari, 2016. "Taming Wicked Problems: The Role of Framing in the Construction of Corporate Social Responsibility," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(3), pages 299-329, May.
    27. Ansari, Shahzad (Shaz) & Krop, Pieter, 2012. "Incumbent performance in the face of a radical innovation: Towards a framework for incumbent challenger dynamics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1357-1374.
    28. Natalia Vuori & Timo O. Vuori & Quy N. Huy, 2018. "Emotional practices: how masking negative emotions impacts the post‐acquisition integration process," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 859-893, March.
    29. William Ocasio, 1997. "Towards An Attention‐Based View Of The Firm," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(S1), pages 187-206, July.
    30. El-Awad, Ziad & Brattström, Anna & Breugst, Nicola, 2022. "Bridging cognitive scripts in multidisciplinary academic spinoff teams: A process perspective on how academics learn to work with non-academic managers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(10).
    31. Christopher Kurzhals & Lorenz Graf‐Vlachy & Andreas König, 2020. "Strategic leadership and technological innovation: A comprehensive review and research agenda," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 437-464, November.
    32. Jean-Louis Denis & Geneviève Dompierre & Ann Langley & Linda Rouleau, 2011. "Escalating Indecision: Between Reification and Strategic Ambiguity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 22(1), pages 225-244, February.
    33. Baxter, David & Trott, Paul & Ellwood, Paul, 2023. "Reconceptualising innovation failure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    34. Stock, Ruth & Groß, Matthias & Xin, Katherine, 2019. "Will Self-Love Take a Fall? Effects of Top Executives’ Positive Self-regard on Firm Innovativeness," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 118837, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    35. Shenghui Ma & David Seidl, 2018. "New CEOs and their collaborators: Divergence and convergence between the strategic leadership constellation and the top management team," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(3), pages 606-638, March.
    36. Stock, Ruth & Groß, Matthias & Xin, Katherine, 2019. "Will Self‐Love Take a Fall? Effects of Top Executives' Positive Self‐Regard on Firm Innovativeness," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 122609, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    37. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    38. Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2020. "Analogical reasoning, cognition, and the response to technological change: Lessons from mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    39. 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.
    40. Ryan Raffaelli & Mary Ann Glynn & Michael Tushman, 2019. "Frame flexibility: The role of cognitive and emotional framing in innovation adoption by incumbent firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 40(7), pages 1013-1039, July.
    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. Yanmei Xu & Yanan Zhang & Xiang Li & Ziqiang Wang & Qiwen Zhang, 2025. "Research on Digital Transformation and the Innovation Model of SMMEs: The Case Study of PAYA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-32, April.

    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. Christopher Kurzhals & Lorenz Graf‐Vlachy & Andreas König, 2020. "Strategic leadership and technological innovation: A comprehensive review and research agenda," Corporate Governance: An International Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 28(6), pages 437-464, November.
    2. Giachetti, Claudio & Mensah, Deborah Tiniwah, 2023. "Catching-up during technological windows of opportunity: An industry product categories perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    3. Vecchiato, Riccardo, 2020. "Analogical reasoning, cognition, and the response to technological change: Lessons from mobile communication," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    4. Dean A. Shepherd & Jeffery S. Mcmullen & William Ocasio, 2017. "Is that an opportunity? An attention model of top managers' opportunity beliefs for strategic action," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 626-644, March.
    5. John Joseph & Alex J. Wilson, 2018. "The growth of the firm: An attention‐based view," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1779-1800, June.
    6. Jantunen, Ari & Tuppura, Anni & Pätäri, Satu, 2024. "Dominant logic – Cognitive and practiced facets and their relationships to strategic renewal and performance," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 108-118.
    7. Garud, Raghu & Gehman, Joel, 2012. "Metatheoretical perspectives on sustainability journeys: Evolutionary, relational and durational," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 980-995.
    8. Sean T. Hsu & Susan K. Cohen, 2022. "Overcoming the Incumbent Dilemma: The Dual Roles of Multimarket Contact During Disruption," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(2), pages 319-348, March.
    9. Szewczyk, Justin & Kurzhals, Christopher & Graf-Vlachy, Lorenz & Kammerlander, Nadine & König, Andreas, 2022. "The family innovator’s dilemma revisited: Examining the association between family influence and incumbents’ adoption of discontinuous technologies," Journal of Family Business Strategy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4).
    10. Nicodemus M. Mutinda & James M. Kilika, 2019. "TMT Cognitive Capability and Organizational Outcomes: A Theoretical Review," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(8), pages 31-52, August.
    11. Godart, Frédéric & Pistilli, Luca, 2024. "The multifaceted concept of disruption: A typology," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    12. Riccardo Vecchiato & Giampiero Favato & Francesco di Maddaloni & Hang Do, 2020. "Foresight, cognition, and long‐term performance: Insights from the automotive industry and opportunities for future research," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 2(1), March.
    13. Shinjinee Chattopadhyay & Janet Bercovitz, 2020. "When one door closes, another door opens … for some: Evidence from the post‐TRIPS Indian pharmaceutical industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(6), pages 988-1022, June.
    14. Jean-Philippe Vergne & Colette Depeyre, 2015. "How do firms adapt? A fuzzy-set analysis of the role of cognition and capabilities in U.S. defense firms’ responses to 9/11," Post-Print hal-01274005, HAL.
    15. Pinar Ozcan & Douglas Hannah, 2020. "Social Origins of Great Strategies Advertising Suppliers to Realize Disruptive Social Media Technology," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 193-217, September.
    16. Arun Kumaraswamy & Raghu Garud & Shahzad (Shaz) Ansari, 2018. "Perspectives on Disruptive Innovations," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(7), pages 1025-1042, November.
    17. Alessio Cozzolino & Gianmario Verona, 2024. "Decision tree for adaptation after radical changes: linking dynamic capabilities, ambidexterity, and strategic alliances," Journal of Management & Governance, Springer;Accademia Italiana di Economia Aziendale (AIDEA), vol. 28(3), pages 745-769, September.
    18. Varshney, Mayank, 2023. "Learning-by-hiring: How do rival firms learn from focal firm's hiring," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    19. Engås, Karen G. & Raja, Jawwad Z. & Neufang, Isabelle Fabienne, 2023. "Decoding technological frames: An exploratory study of access to and meaningful engagement with digital technologies in agriculture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    20. Aversa, Paolo & Guillotin, Olivier, 2018. "Firm technological responses to regulatory changes: A longitudinal study in the Le Mans Prototype racing," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(9), pages 1655-1673.

    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:respol:v:54:y:2025:i:1:s0048733324001562. 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.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.