IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2608.07504.html

Innovating with Generative AI: A Human Bottleneck Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Julian De Freitas
  • Ayelet Israeli
  • Gideon Nave
  • Artem Timoshenko
  • Olivier Toubia

Abstract

We propose a human bottleneck perspective for understanding how generative AI transforms the innovation process. The central premise is that many constraints traditionally plaguing the innovation process are cognitive and social in origin, rooted in how people generate ideas, evaluate novelty, and communicate through social systems. Generative AI does not act uniformly on these constraints. At each stage, it can deepen some bottlenecks while alleviating others, and predicting these outcomes requires understanding the underlying mechanisms of the constraint itself. We identify bottlenecks in four stages of the innovation process: ideation, screening and testing, preference measurement and consumer insight, diffusion, and market learning. By grounding analysis in human behavior rather than rapidly changing AI capabilities, we offer a framework for assessing whether new developments alleviate or intensify the bottlenecks that matter most at each stage. We also distinguish bottlenecks likely to narrow as capabilities improve from those rooted in enduring human constraints. We further discuss AI-related issues that cut across the entire innovation pipeline, challenging the very existence and structure of the traditional innovation process.

Suggested Citation

  • Julian De Freitas & Ayelet Israeli & Gideon Nave & Artem Timoshenko & Olivier Toubia, 2026. "Innovating with Generative AI: A Human Bottleneck Framework," Papers 2608.07504, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2608.07504
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2608.07504
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel, 2006. "Democratizing Innovation," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262720477, December.
    2. Bettman, James R & Luce, Mary Frances & Payne, John W, 1998. "Constructive Consumer Choice Processes," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 25(3), pages 187-217, December.
    3. Qianyue Hao & Fengli Xu & Yong Li & James Evans, 2026. "Artificial intelligence tools expand scientists’ impact but contract science’s focus," Nature, Nature, vol. 649(8099), pages 1237-1243, January.
    4. Artem Timoshenko & John R. Hauser, 2019. "Identifying Customer Needs from User-Generated Content," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 1-20, January.
    5. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    6. Olivier Toubia & George Z. Gui & Tianyi Peng & Daniel J. Merlau & Ang Li & Haozhe Chen, 2025. "Database Report: Twin-2K-500: A Data Set for Building Digital Twins of over 2,000 People Based on Their Answers to over 500 Questions," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(6), pages 1446-1455, November.
    7. Beichen Liang, 2021. "The goal is attainable: the effects of goal gradient and sub-goals on escalation of commitment in a new product evaluation," Innovation & Management Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 18(3), pages 258-275, April.
    8. Mengxin Wang & Dennis J. Zhang & Heng Zhang, 2026. "Large Language Models for Market Research: A Data-Augmentation Approach," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(4), pages 728-751, July.
    9. Yang, Cathy L & Borah, Abhishek & Rhodes, Brendon & Kireyev, Pavel, 2025. "Large Language Models Augment or Substitute Human Experts in Idea Screening," HEC Research Papers Series 1597, HEC Paris, revised 21 Oct 2025.
    10. Terry Connolly & Leonard M. Jessup & Joseph S. Valacich, 1990. "Effects of Anonymity and Evaluative Tone on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 689-703, June.
    11. Anil R. Doshi & Oliver P. Hauser, 2023. "Generative artificial intelligence enhances creativity but reduces the diversity of novel content," Papers 2312.00506, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    12. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    13. Prasanna B. Tambe, 2026. "Reskilling the Workforce for AI: Domain Expertise and Algorithmic Literacy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 72(1), pages 515-537, January.
    14. Dongil D. Keum & Kelly E. See, 2017. "The Influence of Hierarchy on Idea Generation and Selection in the Innovation Process," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(4), pages 653-669, August.
    15. Paola Cillo & Gaia Rubera, 2025. "Generative AI in innovation and marketing processes: A roadmap of research opportunities," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 53(3), pages 684-701, May.
    16. Artem Timoshenko & Chengfeng Mao & John R. Hauser, 2025. "Transforming the Voice of the Customer: Large Language Models for Identifying Customer Needs," Papers 2503.01870, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2026.
    17. Erik Brynjolfsson & Lorin M. Hitt, 2000. "Beyond Computation: Information Technology, Organizational Transformation and Business Performance," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 23-48, Fall.
    18. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    19. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    20. Oded Netzer & Ronen Feldman & Jacob Goldenberg & Moshe Fresko, 2012. "Mine Your Own Business: Market-Structure Surveillance Through Text Mining," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(3), pages 521-543, May.
    21. Ming-Hui Huang & Roland T Rust, 2025. "The GenAI Future of Consumer Research," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 52(1), pages 4-17.
    22. 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.
    23. Peres, Renana & Schreier, Martin & Schweidel, David & Sorescu, Alina, 2023. "On ChatGPT and beyond: How generative artificial intelligence may affect research, teaching, and practice," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 40(2), pages 269-275.
    24. Noah Castelo & Johannes Boegershausen & Christian Hildebrand & Alexander P Henkel & June Cotte & Klaus Wertenbroch, 2023. "Understanding and Improving Consumer Reactions to Service Bots," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 50(4), pages 848-863.
    25. Alfonso Gambardella & Christina Raasch & Eric von Hippel, 2017. "The User Innovation Paradigm: Impacts on Markets and Welfare," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1450-1468, May.
    26. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    27. Xinxin Li & Lorin M. Hitt, 2008. "Self-Selection and Information Role of Online Product Reviews," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 456-474, December.
    28. Jacqueline N. Lane & Misha Teplitskiy & Gary Gray & Hardeep Ranu & Michael Menietti & Eva C. Guinan & Karim R. Lakhani, 2022. "Conservatism Gets Funded? A Field Experiment on the Role of Negative Information in Novel Project Evaluation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4478-4495, June.
    29. Karan Girotra & Christian Terwiesch & Karl T. Ulrich, 2010. "Idea Generation and the Quality of the Best Idea," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 591-605, April.
    30. Byung Cheol Lee & Jaeyeon (Jae) Chung, 2024. "An empirical investigation of the impact of ChatGPT on creativity," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 8(10), pages 1906-1914, October.
    31. Alex Burnap & John R. Hauser & Artem Timoshenko, 2023. "Product Aesthetic Design: A Machine Learning Augmentation," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(6), pages 1029-1056, November.
    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. Subrahmanyam Aditya Karanam & Ashish Agarwal & Anitesh Barua, 2025. "Follow Your Heart or Listen to Users? The Case of Mobile App Design," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 1846-1870, September.
    2. Andreas H. Heusler & Natasha Z. Foutz & Martin Spann & Lucas Stich, 2025. "The idea marketplace: Diversity, social capital, and innovation," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 150-171, January.
    3. Mahka Moeen & Rajshree Agarwal & Sonali K. Shah, 2020. "Building Industries by Building Knowledge: Uncertainty Reduction over Industry Milestones," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 5(3), pages 218-244, September.
    4. Zou, Tengjian & Sun, Xuhang & Wei, Junjie, 2025. "Informal hierarchy and crowdsourcing team performance: The mediating effect of idea quantity and the moderating effect of team familiarity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    5. Simonson, Itamar & Sela, Aner, 2009. "On the Heritability of Choice, Judgment, and "Irrationality": Genetic Effects on Prudence and Constructive Predispositions," Research Papers 2029, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Mahr, Dominik & Lievens, Annouk, 2012. "Virtual lead user communities: Drivers of knowledge creation for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 167-177.
    7. Preißner, Stephanie & Raasch, Christina & Schweisfurth, Tim, 2017. "Is necessity the mother of disruption?," Kiel Working Papers 2097, Kiel Institute for the World Economy.
    8. Schweisfurth, Tim G., 2017. "Comparing internal and external lead users as sources of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 238-248.
    9. Jared R. Curhan & Tatiana Labuzova & Aditi Mehta, 2021. "Cooperative Criticism: When Criticism Enhances Creativity in Brainstorming and Negotiation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(5), pages 1256-1272, September.
    10. Ioannis Evangelidis & Jonathan Levav, 2019. "Process Utility and the Effect of Inaction Frames," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 2328-2341, May.
    11. David Gal, 2006. "A psychological law of inertia and the illusion of loss aversion," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 23-32, July.
    12. Göldner, Moritz & Herstatt, Cornelius & Canhão, Helena & Oliveira, Pedro, 2019. "User entrepreneurs for social innovation: The case of patients and caregivers as developers of tangible medical devices," Working Papers 108, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    13. Claude Paraponaris, 2017. "Plateformes numériques, conception ouverte et emploi," Post-Print halshs-01614430, HAL.
    14. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Lovric, M. & Kaymak, U. & Spronk, J., 2008. "A Conceptual Model of Investor Behavior," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-030-F&A, 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.
    16. Karle, Heiko & Schumacher, Heiner & Vølund, Rune, 2023. "Consumer loss aversion and scale-dependent psychological switching costs," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 214-237.
    17. Erica Mina Okada, 2010. "Uncertainty, Risk Aversion, and WTA vs. WTP," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(1), pages 75-84, 01-02.
    18. Edward H. Chang & Erika L. Kirgios, 2024. "Demographic “Stickiness”: The Demographic Identity of Departing Group Members Influences Who Is Chosen to Replace Them," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 70(7), pages 4236-4259, July.
    19. Franke, Nikolaus & von Hippel, Eric & Schreier, Martin, 2005. "Finding commercially attractive user innovations: A test of lead user theory," Working papers 4536-05, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    20. Karagözoğlu, Emin & Keskin, Kerim, 2024. "Consideration sets and reference points in a dynamic bargaining game," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 381-403.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:arx:papers:2608.07504. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://arxiv.org/ .

    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.