IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Four-Dimensional Product Innovativeness Typology


  • Rosenø, Axel

    (Department of Informatics, Copenhagen Business School)


Product innovativeness is a key moderating variable for the study of innovation management (Song & Montoya-Weiss 1998, p. 124). For this reason, some empirical studies of innovation management examine new product processes, critical success factors, and market learning practices for incremental versus discontinuous new product projects (Song & Montoya-Weiss 1998; Atuahene-Gima 1995; Veryzer 1998a; Lynn et al. 1996; O’Connor 1998; Rice et al. 1998). By looking at both these types of new product development projects, empirical observations are likely to be more realistic than those of studies that do not discriminate between more or less innovative projects. Even so, a dualistic view of the matter does not capture the nuances (Green et al.1995)1 of the relationship between product innovativeness and innovation management practices. Hence, there is a need for richer innovativeness typologies that go beyond the dichotomous view and, thereby, lend themselves to a more finegrained study of innovation management practices for different types of new product projects. In fact, various innovativeness typologies exist that include more than two product types. Notably, the typology by Booz, Allen & Hamilton (1982)2 introduces two dimensions: newness to the market and newness to the company, resulting in six products types (with various combinations of high, medium and low newness). An alternative set of typologies differentiates between the product’s technological newness and its market newness, for example Abernathy & Clark’s (1985) typology with four new product types; Leonard-Barton’s (1995) five product types; and Veryzer’s (1998a) four types in a two-by-two matrix. Interestingly, these two meta-perspectives on product innovativeness (i.e. 1. new to the market and/or new to the company and 2. technological and/or market newness) are generally not included within the same typology in extant literature. For example, discussions of the technological and/or market newness of a product, often leave out the question of whether that newness is in the eyes of the industry and market (exogenous newness) or only for the focal firm itself (endogenous newness). More broadly, it can be stated that “…little continuity exists in the new product literature regarding from whose perspective this degree of newness is viewed and what is new (Garcia & Calantone 2002, p. 112).

Suggested Citation

  • Rosenø, Axel, 2005. "A Four-Dimensional Product Innovativeness Typology," Working Papers 2005-1, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Informatics.
  • Handle: RePEc:hhs:cbsinf:2005_001

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Ravasi, Davide & Verona, Gianmario, 2001. "Organising the process of knowledge integration: the benefits of structural ambiguity," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 41-66, March.
    2. Burgelman, Robert A., 2003. "Strategy Making and Evolutionary Organization Theory: Insights from Longitudinal Process Research," Research Papers 1844, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. Nicolai J. Foss, 2001. "Selective Intervention and Internal HybridsInterpreting and Learning from the Rise and Decline of the Oticon Spaghetti Organization," DRUID Working Papers 01-16, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item



    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:hhs:cbsinf:2005_001. 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: (Lars Nondal). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.