IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v48y2002i9p1103-1122.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics

Author

Listed:
  • Hubert Gatignon

    () (INSEAD, Boulevard de Constance, 77305 Fontainebleau Cedex, France)

  • Michael L. Tushman

    () (Harvard Business School, Morgan Hall, Soldiers Field, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

  • Wendy Smith

    () (Harvard Business School, Morgan Hall, Soldiers Field, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

  • Philip Anderson

    () (INSEAD, Boulevard de Constance, 77305 Fontainebleau Cedex, France)

Abstract

We take a structural approach to assessing innovation. We develop a comprehensive set of measures to assess an innovation's locus, type, and characteristics. We find that the concepts of competence destroying and competence enhancing are composed of two distinct constructs that, although correlated, separately characterize an innovation: new competence acquisition and competence enhancement/destruction. We develop scales to measure these constructs and show that new competence acquisition and competence enhancing/destroying are different from other innovation characteristics including core/peripheral and incremental/radical, as well as architectural and generational innovation types. We show that innovations can be evaluated distinctively on these various dimensions with generally small correlations between them. We estimate the impact these different innovation characteristics and types have on time to introduction and perceived commercial success. Our results indicate the importance of taking a structural approach to describing innovations and to the differential importance of innovation locus, type, and characteristics on innovation outcomes. Our results also raise intriguing questions regarding the locus of competence acquisition (internal vs. external) and both innovation outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Hubert Gatignon & Michael L. Tushman & Wendy Smith & Philip Anderson, 2002. "A Structural Approach to Assessing Innovation: Construct Development of Innovation Locus, Type, and Characteristics," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(9), pages 1103-1122, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:48:y:2002:i:9:p:1103-1122
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.48.9.1103.174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.48.9.1103.174
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Chesbrough, Henry W, 1999. "The Organizational Impact of Technological Change: A Comparative Theory of National Institutional Factors," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 447-485, September.
    3. Henderson, Rebecca, 1995. "Of life cycles real and imaginary: The unexpectedly long old age of optical lithography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 631-643, July.
    4. Rosenkopf, Lori & Tushman, Michael L, 1998. "The Coevolution of Community Networks and Technology: Lessons from the Flight Simulation Industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 311-346, June.
    5. Iansiti, Marco & Khanna, Tarun, 1995. "Technological Evolution, System Architecture and the Obsolescence of Firm Capabilities," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 333-361.
    6. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    7. John E. Ettlie & William P. Bridges & Robert D. O'Keefe, 1984. "Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 30(6), pages 682-695, June.
    8. Clark, Kim B., 1985. "The interaction of design hierarchies and market concepts in technological evolution," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(5), pages 235-251, October.
    9. Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Underinvestment and Incompetence as Responses to Radical Innovation: Evidence from the Photolithographic Alignment Equipment Industry," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 24(2), pages 248-270, Summer.
    10. Richard R. Nelson, 1995. "Recent Evolutionary Theorizing about Economic Change," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 33(1), pages 48-90, March.
    11. Fariborz Damanpour, 1996. "Organizational Complexity and Innovation: Developing and Testing Multiple Contingency Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(5), pages 693-716, May.
    12. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    13. Anderson, Philip & Tushman, Michael L, 2001. "Organizational Environments and Industry Exit: The Effects of Uncertainty, Munificence and Complexity," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(3), pages 675-711, September.
    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. 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.
    2. Mary Tripsas, 2008. "Customer preference discontinuities: a trigger for radical technological change," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(2-3), pages 79-97.
    3. Kristina McElheran, 2015. "Do Market Leaders Lead in Business Process Innovation? The Case(s) of E-business Adoption," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1197-1216, June.
    4. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    5. Marco Iansiti, 2000. "How the Incumbent Can Win: Managing Technological Transitions in the Semiconductor Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(2), pages 169-185, February.
    6. Iansiti, Marco, 1995. "Technology integration: Managing technological evolution in a complex environment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 521-542, July.
    7. Ron Adner & Rahul Kapoor, 2016. "Innovation ecosystems and the pace of substitution: Re-examining technology S-curves," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 625-648, April.
    8. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    9. Scaringella, Laurent & Burtschell, François, 2017. "The challenges of radical innovation in Iran: Knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity highlights — Evidence from a joint venture in the construction sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 151-169.
    10. Paul E. Bierly III & Paula S. Daly, 2007. "Alternative Knowledge Strategies, Competitive Environment, and Organizational Performance in Small Manufacturing Firms," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 31(4), pages 493-516, July.
    11. 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.
    12. Bruce Rasmussen, 2010. "Innovation and Commercialisation in the Biopharmaceutical Industry," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13680.
    13. Jackie Krafft, 2004. "Shakeout in industrial dynamics: new developments, new puzzles," Chapters, in: John Foster & Werner Hölzl (ed.), Applied Evolutionary Economics and Complex Systems, chapter 8, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Barnett, William P. & McKendrick, David, 2001. "The Organizational Evolution of Global Technological Competition," Research Papers 1682, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    15. Sobrero, Maurizio & Roberts, Edward B., 2002. "Strategic management of supplier-manufacturer relations in new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 159-182, January.
    16. Huvaj, M. Nesij & Johnson, William C., 2019. "Organizational complexity and innovation portfolio decisions: Evidence from a quasi-natural experiment," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 153-165.
    17. 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.
    18. Scott A. Shane & Karl T. Ulrich, 2004. "50th Anniversary Article: Technological Innovation, Product Development, and Entrepreneurship in Management Science," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(2), pages 133-144, February.
    19. 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.
    20. Leyla Orudzheva & Manjula S. Salimath & Robert Pavur, 2020. "Vortex of Corruption: Longitudinal Analysis of Normative Pressures in Top Global Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 163(3), pages 529-551, May.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:48:y:2002:i:9:p:1103-1122. 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: (Matthew Walls). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.