IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ems/eureri/13833.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Understanding a Two-Sided Coin: Antecedents and Consequences of a Decomposed Product Advantage

Author

Listed:
  • Rijsdijk, S.A.
  • Langerak, F.
  • Hultink, E.J.

Abstract

This article investigates the antecedents and consequences of two product advantage components: product meaningfulness and product superiority. Product meaningfulness concerns the benefits that users receive from buying and using a new product, whereas product superiority concerns the extent to which a new product outperforms competing products. The authors argue that scholars and managers should make a deliberate distinction between the two components because they are theoretically distinct and also have different antecedents and consequences. The authors collected data through an online survey on 141 new products from high-tech companies located in the Netherlands. The results reveal that new products need to be meaningful as well as superior to competing products in order to be successful. This finding is consistent with the prevailing aggregate view on product advantage in the literature. However, the results also show that the effects of the two components on new product performance are moderated by market turbulence. Although each component is important in that it forms a necessary precondition for the other to affect new product performance under circumstances of moderate market turbulence, meaningfulness is most important for new product performance in turbulent markets where preferences have not yet taken shape. In contrast, when markets become more stable, the uniqueness of meaningful attributes decreases and new products that provide advantage by fulfilling their functions in a way that is superior to competing products are more likely to perform well. In addition, the study shows that the firm’s customer and competitor knowledge processes independently lead to product meaningfulness and superiority, respectively. The findings also reveal that under conditions of high technological turbulence, the customer and competitor knowledge processes complement each other in creating product meaningfulness and superiority. This implies that the level of technological turbulence puts requirements upon the breadth of firms’ market knowledge processes in order to create a new product with sufficient advantage to become successful. The authors conclude that neglecting the distinction between product meaningfulness and superiority when assessing a new product’s advantage may lead to an incomplete insight on how firms can improve the performance of their new products.

Suggested Citation

  • Rijsdijk, S.A. & Langerak, F. & Hultink, E.J., 2008. "Understanding a Two-Sided Coin: Antecedents and Consequences of a Decomposed Product Advantage," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2008-074-ORG, 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:13833
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://repub.eur.nl/pub/13833/ERS-2008-074-ORG.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deborah Gladstein Ancona & David F. Caldwell, 1992. "Demography and Design: Predictors of New Product Team Performance," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 321-341, August.
    2. Clayton M. Christensen & Fernando F. Suárez & James M. Utterback, 1998. "Strategies for Survival in Fast-Changing Industries," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(12-Part-2), pages 207-220, December.
    3. Im, Subin & Hussain, Mahmood & Sengupta, Sanjit, 2008. "Testing interaction effects of the dimensions of market orientation on marketing program creativity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 61(8), pages 859-867, August.
    4. P. M. Bentler & Chih-Ping Chou, 1987. "Practical Issues in Structural Modeling," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 16(1), pages 78-117, August.
    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. Chen, Tingting & Li, Fuli & Chen, Xiao-Ping & Ou, Zhanying, 2018. "Innovate or die: How should knowledge-worker teams respond to technological turbulence?," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 1-16.
    2. Chen, Chien-Wei & Lien, Nai-Hwa, 2013. "Technological opportunism and firm performance: Moderating contexts," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(11), pages 2218-2225.
    3. Xuan Liu & Meimei Chen & Jia Li & Ling Ma, 2019. "How to Manage Diversity and Enhance Team Performance: Evidence from Online Doctor Teams in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(1), pages 1-17, December.
    4. Cecere, Grazia & Corrocher, Nicoletta & Battaglia, Riccardo David, 2015. "Innovation and competition in the smartphone industry: Is there a dominant design?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 162-175.
    5. Winklhofer, Heidi & Diamantopoulos, Adamantios, 2003. "A model of export sales forecasting behavior and performance: development and testing," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 271-285.
    6. Reynolds, Kate L. & Harris, Lloyd C., 2009. "Dysfunctional Customer Behavior Severity: An Empirical Examination," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 85(3), pages 321-335.
    7. Balter, Anne G. & Huisman, Kuno J.M. & Kort, Peter M., 2022. "Effects of creative destruction on the size and timing of an investment," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 252(C).
    8. Thomas Kochan & Marc Weinstein, 1994. "Recent Developments in US Industrial Relations," British Journal of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics, vol. 32(4), pages 483-504, December.
    9. Harborne, Paul & Hendry, Chris, 2009. "Pathways to commercial wind power in the US, Europe and Japan: The role of demonstration projects and field trials in the innovation process," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 3580-3595, September.
    10. Yeoh Khar Kheng & Sethela June, 2016. "Fostering the Innovative Work Behavior of Knowledge Workers in Malaysia’s Knowledge Intensive Business Services: A Social Capital Perspective," International Journal of Management Sciences, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 7(3), pages 162-169.
    11. Goebel, Daniel J. & Marshall, Greg W. & Locander, William B., 2006. "Getting one's own way: An investigation of influence attempts by marketers on nonmarketing members of the firm," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(7), pages 829-837, July.
    12. Dario Blanco-Fernandez & Stephan Leitner & Alexandra Rausch, 2022. "Interactions between the individual and the group level in organizations: The case of learning and autonomous group adaptation," Papers 2203.09162, arXiv.org.
    13. Jean, Ruey Jer “Bryan” & Kim, Daekwan & Bello, Daniel C., 2017. "Relationship-based product innovations: Evidence from the global supply chain," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 127-140.
    14. Ho‐Uk Lee & Jong‐Hun Park, 2008. "The Influence of Top Management Team International Exposure on International Alliance Formation," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(5), pages 961-981, July.
    15. Justina GineikienÄ—, 2013. "Consumer Nostalgia Literature Review And An Alternative Measurement Perspective," Organizations and Markets in Emerging Economies, Faculty of Economics, Vilnius University, vol. 4(2).
    16. Fu-Sheng Tsai & Gayle Baugh & Shih-Chieh Fang & Julia Lin, 2014. "Contingent contingency: Knowledge heterogeneity and new product development performance revisited," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 149-169, March.
    17. Mayer-Haug, Katrin & Read, Stuart & Brinckmann, Jan & Dew, Nicholas & Grichnik, Dietmar, 2013. "Entrepreneurial talent and venture performance: A meta-analytic investigation of SMEs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 1251-1273.
    18. Lung Chen & Mei-Yen Chen & Ying Kee & Ying-Mei Tsai, 2009. "Validation of the Gratitude Questionnaire (GQ) in Taiwanese Undergraduate Students," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 10(6), pages 655-664, December.
    19. Najda-Janoszka, Marta, 2017. "Industry Transition - Challenges for Value Capture," MPRA Paper 81919, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Da Mota de Pina E Cunha, A.M., 1998. "Determinants of Product Innovation in Organizations : Practices and Performance in the Portugese Financial Sector," Other publications TiSEM e6e4e56e-b72a-4392-8d79-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    product meaningfulness; product superiority;

    JEL classification:

    • M - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics
    • M11 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Production Management
    • M13 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - New Firms; Startups
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D

    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:ems:eureri:13833. 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: RePub (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/erimanl.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.