IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ororsc/v18y2007i2p217-232.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

When Is a New Thing a Good Thing? Technological Change, Product Form Design, and Perceptions of Value for Product Innovations

Author

Listed:
  • Violina P. Rindova

    (McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas 78712)

  • Antoaneta P. Petkova

    (353 Business Building, San Francisco State University, San Francisco, California 94132)

Abstract

Innovation researchers recognize that the uncertainty with regard to the value-creating potential of product innovations increases with their technological novelty, and have argued that the usefulness and value of novel products are socially constructed. Despite this recognition, researchers have not explored how the outer form in which a technological innovation is embodied influences the processes through which the innovation’s value is constructed and perceived. In this paper we argue that by embodying novel technologies in objects with specific functional, symbolic, and aesthetic properties, innovating firms also endow their products with cues that trigger a variety of cognitive and emotional responses. Drawing on psychological research we articulate how such cognitive and emotional responses underlie initial perceptions of value and theorize how innovating firms can influence them through product form design. Our framework explains how product form contributes to perceptions of value by modulating the actual technological novelty of a product innovation and facilitating how customers cope with it. Our theoretical framework makes an important contribution to innovation research and practice because it articulates how product form can be used strategically to achieve specific cognitive and emotional effects and enhance the initial customer perceptions of the value of an innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Violina P. Rindova & Antoaneta P. Petkova, 2007. "When Is a New Thing a Good Thing? Technological Change, Product Form Design, and Perceptions of Value for Product Innovations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(2), pages 217-232, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ororsc:v:18:y:2007:i:2:p:217-232
    DOI: 10.1287/orsc.1060.0233
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1060.0233
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/orsc.1060.0233?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. Moreau, C Page & Markman, Arthur B & Lehmann, Donald R, 2001. ""What Is It?" Categorization Flexibility and Consumers' Responses to Really New Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 27(4), pages 489-498, March.
    2. Mick, David Glen & Fournier, Susan, 1998. "Paradoxes of Technology: Consumer Cognizance, Emotions, and Coping Strategies," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(2), pages 123-143, September.
    3. 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.
    4. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    5. Forgas, Joseph P. & George, Jennifer M., 2001. "Affective Influences on Judgments and Behavior in Organizations: An Information Processing Perspective," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 3-34, September.
    6. Anat Rafaeli & Iris Vilnai-Yavetz, 2004. "Emotion as a Connection of Physical Artifacts and Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 15(6), pages 671-686, December.
    7. 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.
    8. Christensen, Jens Froslev, 1995. "Asset profiles for technological innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 727-745, September.
    9. Gregan-Paxton, Jennifer & John, Deborah Roedder, 1997. "Consumer Learning by Analogy: A Model of Internal Knowledge Transfer," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 24(3), pages 266-284, December.
    10. Deborah Dougherty, 2001. "Reimagining the Differentiation and Integration of Work for Sustained Product Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(5), pages 612-631, October.
    11. Deborah Dougherty & Trudy Heller, 1994. "The Illegitimacy of Successful Product Innovation in Established Firms," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(2), pages 200-218, May.
    12. Rita Gunther McGrath & Ming-Hone Tsai & S. Venkataraman & I. C. MacMillan, 1996. "Innovation, Competitive Advantage and Rent: A Model and Test," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(3), pages 389-403, March.
    13. Meyers-Levy, Joan & Tybout, Alice M, 1989. "Schema Congruity as a Basis for Product Evaluation," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 16(1), pages 39-54, June.
    14. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    15. Tripsas, Mary, 1997. "Surviving Radical Technological Change through Dynamic Capability: Evidence from the Typesetter Industry," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(2), pages 341-377, March.
    16. Gregory S. Carpenter & Kent Nakamoto, 1990. "Competitive Strategies for Late Entry into a Market with a Dominant Brand," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(10), pages 1268-1278, October.
    17. Kahn, Barbara E & Isen, Alice M, 1993. "The Influence of Positive Affect on Variety Seeking among Safe, Enjoyable Products," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 20(2), pages 257-270, September.
    18. Rafael Ramírez, 1999. "Value co‐production: intellectual origins and implications for practice and research," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(1), pages 49-65, January.
    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. 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.
    2. Alva Taylor, 2010. "The Next Generation: Technology Adoption and Integration Through Internal Competition in New Product Development," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(1), pages 23-41, February.
    3. 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.
    4. Scaringella, Laurent & Miles, Raymond E. & Truong, Yann, 2017. "Customers involvement and firm absorptive capacity in radical innovation: The case of technological spin-offs," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 144-162.
    5. 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.
    6. Mary Tripsas, 2009. "Technology, Identity, and Inertia Through the Lens of “The Digital Photography Company”," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 20(2), pages 441-460, April.
    7. Jean-Charles Pillet & Federico Pigni & Claudio Vitari, 2017. "Learning About Ambiguous Technologies: Conceptualization And Research Agenda," Post-Print halshs-01923653, HAL.
    8. Byung Cheol Lee & Christine Moorman & C. Page Moreau & Andrew T. Stephen & Donald R. Lehmann, 2020. "The past, present, and future of innovation research," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 31(2), pages 187-198, September.
    9. 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.
    10. Giachetti, Claudio & Mensah, Deborah Tiniwah, 2023. "Catching-up during technological windows of opportunity: An industry product categories perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    11. Victor P. Seidel & Siobhán O’Mahony, 2014. "Managing the Repertoire: Stories, Metaphors, Prototypes, and Concept Coherence in Product Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 691-712, June.
    12. Peeters, T.J.G., 2013. "External knowledge search and use in new product development," Other publications TiSEM 300ebb34-b090-4210-b95e-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    13. Cécile Fonrouge & Cécile Ayerbe, 2005. "Les transitions entre innovations : études de cas et proposition d'une grille d'interprétation," Post-Print halshs-00696111, HAL.
    14. Dwibedy, Punyashlok, 2022. "Informal competition and product innovation decisions of new ventures and incumbents across developing and transitioning countries," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    15. Kertcher, Zack & Venkatraman, Rohan & Coslor, Erica, 2020. "Pleasingly parallel: Early cross-disciplinary work for innovation diffusion across boundaries in grid computing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 581-594.
    16. Cécile Ayerbe & Cécile Fonrouge, 2005. "Les transitions entre innovations:études de cas et proposition d’une grille d’interprétation," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 8(2), pages 39-64, June.
    17. Loris Gaio, 2005. "A diversity-based approach to requirements tracing in new product development," ROCK Working Papers 031, Department of Computer and Management Sciences, University of Trento, Italy, revised 13 Jun 2008.
    18. Alvesson, Mats & Sveningsson, Stefan, 2011. "Management is the solution: Now what was the problem? On the fragile basis for managerialism," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 349-361.
    19. Pettus, Michael L. & Kor, Yasemin Y. & Mahoney, Joseph T., 2007. "A Theory of Change in Turbulent Environments: The Sequencing of Dynamic Capabilities Following Industry Deregulation," Working Papers 07-0100, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Business.
    20. Cappetta, Rossella & Cillo, Paola & Ponti, Anna, 2006. "Convergent designs in fine fashion: An evolutionary model for stylistic innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 1273-1290, November.

    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:ororsc:v:18:y:2007:i:2:p:217-232. 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.