Testing whether major innovation capabilities are systemic design capabilities: analyzing rule-renewal design capabilities in a case-control study of historical new business developments
In this paper, we empirically test the proposition that major innovation (MI) capabilities are systemic, dynamic capabilities. We rely on design theories and characterize the systemic, dynamic capabilities as design capabilities that renew a core of stabilized design rules. For the specific case of projects leading to new business development, we conducted a case-control study of 46 historical projects; 26 of these led to new business development, and 20 do not lead to new business development. Utilizing this sample, we show that our measurement model, based on rule-reuse vs. rule-renewal design capabilities, has a good fit. We find that rule-renewal design capabilities are positively related to new business development, whereas rule-reuse design capabilities (maintaining an invariant set of design rules) are independent of new business development. We discuss different combinations of rule-reuse and rule-renewal design capabilities. This paper contributes to the literature on MI capabilities. It also theoretically and methodologically contributes to the analysis of the dynamic capabilities of design activities
|Date of creation:||2013|
|Date of revision:|
|Publication status:||Published - Presented, 13th Annual Conference of the European Academy of Management, EURAM 2013, 2013, Istanbul, Turkey|
|Note:||View the original document on HAL open archive server: http://hal-ensmp.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00881700|
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Andrew A. King & Christopher L. Tucci, 2002. "Incumbent Entry into New Market Niches: The Role of Experience and Managerial Choice in the Creation of Dynamic Capabilities," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(2), pages 171-186, February.
- Aaron J. Shenhar, 2001. "One Size Does Not Fit All Projects: Exploring Classical Contingency Domains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(3), pages 394-414, March.
- Stanislav Kolenikov, 2009.
"Confirmatory factor analysis using confa,"
StataCorp LP, vol. 9(3), pages 329-373, September.
- Billie Jo Zirger & Modesto A. Maidique, 1990. "A Model of New Product Development: An Empirical Test," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(7), pages 867-883, July.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00881700. 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: (CCSD)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.