IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v68y2022i12p8889-8908.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

I Don’t “Recall”: The Decision to Delay Innovation Launch to Avoid Costly Product Failure

Author

Listed:
  • Byungyeon Kim

    (Harvard Business School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

  • Oded Koenigsberg

    (London Business School, University of London, London NW1 4SA, United Kingdom)

  • Elie Ofek

    (Harvard Business School, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts 02163)

Abstract

Innovations embody novel features or cutting-edge components aimed at delivering desired customer benefits. Oftentimes, however, we observe the need to recall new products shortly after their introduction. Indeed, a firm may rush an innovation to market in an attempt to pre-empt rivals and capture early demand, yet in so doing forgo rigorous testing, thus subjecting itself to the risk of a product recall. To shed light on this phenomenon, we construct a dynamic game-theoretic model in which firms plan to launch their innovations. Each firm must decide whether to conduct time-consuming quality assurance testing, which ensures no defects or safety problems but delays the launch. If the innovation is released without such testing and a recall occurs, the firm incurs pecuniary costs and faces future reputation damage in marketing the recalled innovation. We investigate the strategic forces behind firms’ testing and launch-timing decisions in this context. The analysis uncovers a novel mechanism, linked to the possibility of a rival going bankrupt, that causes firms to become more inclined to rush to market and take on the risk of product failure even as the negative consequences of a recall increase. The results further demonstrate how firms’ desire to forgo testing exhibits an inverse-U pattern as consumers become more heterogeneous and how competitive forces may induce both firms to forgo testing, although the resulting profits are lower than had they both committed to conduct testing. The framework is extended to examine how product recall considerations affect firms’ research and development (R&D) investments. Although, in general, post-innovation product failure discourages R&D effort, we identify conditions under which an increase in the recall probability stimulates firms to innovate. Several model extensions are presented, and managerial implications are discussed.

Suggested Citation

  • Byungyeon Kim & Oded Koenigsberg & Elie Ofek, 2022. "I Don’t “Recall”: The Decision to Delay Innovation Launch to Avoid Costly Product Failure," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 8889-8908, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:68:y:2022:i:12:p:8889-8908
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4303
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4303
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4303?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jean Tirole, 1988. "The Theory of Industrial Organization," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262200716, April.
    2. Jehoshua Eliashberg & Abel P. Jeuland, 1986. "The Impact of Competitive Entry in a Developing Market Upon Dynamic Pricing Strategies," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(1), pages 20-36.
    3. Luís M. B. Cabral, 2003. "R&D Competition when firms Choose Variance," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(1), pages 139-150, March.
    4. Leslie Olin Morgan & Ruskin M. Morgan & William L. Moore, 2001. "Quality and Time-to-Market Trade-offs when There Are Multiple Product Generations," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 3(2), pages 89-104, June.
    5. V. Krishnan & Karl T. Ulrich, 2001. "Product Development Decisions: A Review of the Literature," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 1-21, January.
    6. Cabral, Luis M. B., 2002. "Increasing Dominance with No Efficiency Effect," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 471-479, February.
    7. Lan Luo & P. K. Kannan & Brian T. Ratchford, 2007. "New Product Development Under Channel Acceptance," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 149-163, 03-04.
    8. Ely Dahan & Haim Mendelson, 2001. "An Extreme-Value Model of Concept Testing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 102-116, January.
    9. Morris A. Cohen & Jehoshua Eliasberg & Teck-Hua Ho, 1996. "New Product Development: The Performance and Time-to-Market Tradeoff," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(2), pages 173-186, February.
    10. Yan Liu & Venkatesh Shankar, 2015. "The Dynamic Impact of Product-Harm Crises on Brand Preference and Advertising Effectiveness: An Empirical Analysis of the Automobile Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(10), pages 2514-2535, October.
    11. Srikant Datar & Clark Jordan & Sunder Kekre & Surendra Rajiv & Kannan Srinivasan, 1997. "New Product Development Structures and Time-to-Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 43(4), pages 452-464, April.
    12. Ganesh Iyer & David Soberman, 2000. "Markets for Product Modification Information," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(3), pages 203-225, February.
    13. Harald Van Heerde & Kristiaan Helsen & Marnik G. Dekimpe, 2007. "The Impact of a Product-Harm Crisis on Marketing Effectiveness," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(2), pages 230-245, 03-04.
    14. Kamien, Morton I & Schwartz, Nancy L, 1972. "Timing of Innovations Under Rivalry," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 40(1), pages 43-60, January.
    15. Stefan Thomke & David E. Bell, 2001. "Sequential Testing in Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(2), pages 308-323, February.
    16. Chakravarthi Narasimhan & Z. John Zhang, 2000. "Market Entry Strategy Under Firm Heterogeneity and Asymmetric Payoffs," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 313-327, November.
    17. George Li & S. Rajagopalan, 1998. "Process Improvement, Quality, and Learning Effects," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(11-Part-1), pages 1517-1532, November.
    18. Dominique Olié Lauga & Elie Ofek, 2009. "Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 373-396, 03-04.
    19. Sergei Savin & Christian Terwiesch, 2005. "Optimal Product Launch Times in a Duopoly: Balancing Life-Cycle Revenues with Product Cost," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 26-47, February.
    20. Liang Guo & Ying Zhao, 2009. "Voluntary Quality Disclosure and Market Interaction," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(3), pages 488-501, 05-06.
    21. Ganesh Iyer & Shubhranshu Singh, 2018. "Voluntary Product Safety Certification," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(2), pages 695-714, February.
    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. 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.
    2. Liao, Shuangqing & Seifert, Ralf W., 2015. "On the optimal frequency of multiple generation product introductions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 245(3), pages 805-814.
    3. Franses, Ph.H.B.F. & Hernández-Mireles, C., 2006. "When Should Nintendo Launch its Wii? Insights From a Bivariate Successive Generation Model," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2006-032-MKT, 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.
    4. Dominique Olié Lauga & Elie Ofek, 2009. "Market Research and Innovation Strategy in a Duopoly," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(2), pages 373-396, 03-04.
    5. Lin, Jun & Chai, Kah Hin & Brombacher, Aarnout C. & Wong, Yoke San, 2009. "Optimal overlapping and functional interaction in product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 196(3), pages 1158-1169, August.
    6. Ron N. Borkovsky, 2017. "The timing of version releases: A dynamic duopoly model," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 187-239, September.
    7. Laksana, Kamonkan & Hartman, Joseph C., 2010. "Planning product design refreshes with service contract and competition considerations," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 189-203, August.
    8. Sivakumar, K. & Feng, Cong, 2019. "Patterns of product improvements and customer response," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 27-43.
    9. Nur Sunar & John R. Birge & Sinit Vitavasiri, 2019. "Optimal Dynamic Product Development and Launch for a Network of Customers," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 770-790, May.
    10. Ganesh Iyer & Shubhranshu Singh, 2022. "Persuasion Contest: Disclosing Own and Rival Information," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(4), pages 682-709, July.
    11. Freiesleben, Johannes, 2010. "Proposing a new approach to discussing economic effects of design quality," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 348-359, April.
    12. Gilvan C. Souza & Barry L. Bayus & Harvey M. Wagner, 2004. "New-Product Strategy and Industry Clockspeed," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(4), pages 537-549, April.
    13. Young Kwark & Jianqing Chen & Srinivasan Raghunathan, 2018. "User-Generated Content and Competing Firms’ Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(10), pages 4608-4628, October.
    14. Carrillo, Janice E. & Franza, Richard M., 2006. "Investing in product development and production capabilities: The crucial linkage between time-to-market and ramp-up time," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(2), pages 536-556, June.
    15. Souza, Gilvan C., 2004. "Product introduction decisions in a duopoly," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(3), pages 745-757, February.
    16. Druehl, Cheryl T. & Schmidt, Glen M. & Souza, Gilvan C., 2009. "The optimal pace of product updates," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(2), pages 621-633, January.
    17. Liang Guo, 2021. "Partial Unraveling and Strategic Contract Timing," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7719-7736, December.
    18. Nathan Williams & P. K. Kannan & Shapour Azarm, 2011. "Retail Channel Structure Impact on Strategic Engineering Product Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(5), pages 897-914, May.
    19. Yassine, Ali A. & Sreenivas, Ramavarapu S. & Zhu, Jian, 2008. "Managing the exchange of information in product development," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 311-326, January.
    20. Yuanfang Lin & Amit Pazgal, 2016. "Hide Supremacy or Admit Inferiority—Market Entry Strategies in Response to Consumer Informational Needs," Customer Needs and Solutions, Springer;Institute for Sustainable Innovation and Growth (iSIG), vol. 3(2), pages 94-103, June.

    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:68:y:2022:i:12:p:8889-8908. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.