IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/respol/v50y2021i8s0048733320301463.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Need-solution pair recognition by household sector individuals: Evidence, and a cognitive mechanism explanation

Author

Listed:
  • Stock-Homburg, Ruth M.
  • Heald, Shannon L.M.
  • Holthaus, Christian
  • Gillert, Nils Lennart
  • Hippel, Eric von

Abstract

Problem-solving by everyday individuals is thought to occur as a two-step process. First, an individual identifies or formulates a problem, followed by entering into a subsequent search to find the best solution. Here, however, we consider an alternative process that everyday individuals may use for solution finding first theorized by von Hippel and von Krogh (2016). Specifically, von Hippel and von Krogh proposed that everyday individuals may sometimes discover a solution and the need it satisfies simultaneously without the need for apriori problem formation, a cognitive process they called “need-solution pair recognition”. Utilizing a rich literature from psychology and neuroscience, we propose that seemingly spontaneous discoveries found by need-solution pair recognition are natural products of the object recognition system and its underlying mechanisms. This view asserts that on encountering an object and reasoning how it might be used (i.e. functional object understanding), an individual's perception of an object may culminate in recognizing the object as a solution, and in some cases, as a solution to a problem previously unknown to him or her, thus bypassing formal problem-formulation and active solution searching entirely. To empirically test this view, we manipulated the ability of everyday individuals to functionally reason about objects while we examined the spontaneous occurrence of solutions found by either need-solution pair recognition or traditional problem-first problem-solving. Consistent with our hypothesized mechanism, our results indicate that need-solution pair recognition occurs more frequently when constraints on functional object understanding are reduced. That is, we found that needsolution pair discoveries outpaced solutions found from traditional problem solving, in environments with unfamiliar objects, where participants were not directed to solve specific problems. Our results provide clear evidence that everyday individuals in the household sector do not always innovate through traditional problem-solving processes, but instead may arrive at solutions as they recognize and reason about objects. Implications for research and practice in household innovation, and for innovation more generally are considered.

Suggested Citation

  • Stock-Homburg, Ruth M. & Heald, Shannon L.M. & Holthaus, Christian & Gillert, Nils Lennart & Hippel, Eric von, 2021. "Need-solution pair recognition by household sector individuals: Evidence, and a cognitive mechanism explanation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:8:s0048733320301463
    DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2020.104068
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733320301463
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.respol.2020.104068?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Eric von Hippel & Georg von Krogh, 2016. "CROSSROADS—Identifying Viable “Need–Solution Pairs”: Problem Solving Without Problem Formulation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 207-221, February.
    2. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    3. Stock, Ruth & Totzauer, Florian & Zacharias, Nicolas, 2014. "A Closer Look at Cross-functional R&D Cooperation for Innovativeness: Innovation-oriented Leadership and Human Resource Practices as Driving Forces," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 71019, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    4. Stock, Ruth Maria & Hippel, Eric von & Gillert, Nils Lennart, 2016. "Impacts of Personality Traits on Consumer Innovation Success," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 77346, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    5. Cunha, Miguel Pina e & Clegg, Stewart R. & Mendonça, Sandro, 2010. "On serendipity and organizing," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 319-330, October.
    6. Yaqub, Ohid, 2018. "Serendipity: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 169-179.
    7. Stock, Ruth & Totzauer, Florian & Zacharias, Nicolas, 2014. "A Closer Look at Cross-functional R&D Cooperation for Innovativeness: Innovation-oriented Leadership and Human Resource Practices as Driving Forces," Publications of Darmstadt Technical University, Institute for Business Studies (BWL) 69918, Darmstadt Technical University, Department of Business Administration, Economics and Law, Institute for Business Studies (BWL).
    8. Stock, Ruth Maria & von Hippel, Eric & Gillert, Nils Lennart, 2016. "Impacts of personality traits on consumer innovation success," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(4), pages 757-769.
    9. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & von Hippel, Eric & Gault, Fred & Kuusisto, Jari & Raasch, Christina, 2015. "Market failure in the diffusion of consumer-developed innovations: Patterns in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1856-1865.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Ben-Menahem, Shiko M. & Franke, Nikolaus & Füller, Johann & von Krogh, Georg, 2021. "Treading new ground in household sector innovation research: Scope, emergence, business implications, and diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    2. Busch, Christian, 2024. "Towards a theory of serendipity: a systematic review and conceptualization," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 122704, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    3. Raphaelle Barbier & Skander Ben Yahia & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil, 2022. "Co-Design for Novelty Anchoring Into Multiple Socio-Technical Systems in Transitions: The Case of Earth Observation Data," Post-Print hal-03772981, HAL.

    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. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Ben-Menahem, Shiko M. & Franke, Nikolaus & Füller, Johann & von Krogh, Georg, 2021. "Treading new ground in household sector innovation research: Scope, emergence, business implications, and diffusion," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    2. von Hippel, Christiana D. & Cann, Andrew B., 2021. "Behavioral innovation: Pilot study and new big data analysis approach in household sector user innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    3. de Jong, Jeroen P.J. & Gillert, Nils Lennart & Stock, Ruth M., 2018. "First adoption of consumer innovations: Exploring market failure and alleviating factors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 487-497.
    4. Schweisfurth, Tim G. & Dharmawan, Magha P., 2019. "Does lead userness foster idea implementation and diffusion? A study of internal shopfloor users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 289-297.
    5. Fursov, Konstantin & Thurner, Thomas & Nefedova, Alena, 2017. "What user-innovators do that others don't: A study of daily practices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 153-160.
    6. Pieper, Thorsten & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2018. "User innovation barriers and their impact on user-developed products," Working Papers 106, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    7. Schweisfurth, Tim G., 2017. "Comparing internal and external lead users as sources of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 238-248.
    8. Halbinger, Maria A., 2018. "The role of makerspaces in supporting consumer innovation and diffusion: An empirical analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 2028-2036.
    9. Mulhuijzen, Max & de Jong, Jeroen P.J., 2023. "The rich or the poor? Personal resources, do-it-yourself, and innovation in the household sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).
    10. Lukoschek, Carmen Sabrina & Stock-Homburg, Ruth Maria, 2021. "Integrating Home and Work: How the Work Environment Enhances Household-Sector Innovations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    11. Matti Grosse, 2018. "How User-Innovators Pave the Way for a Sustainable Energy Future: A Study among German Energy Enthusiasts," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-16, December.
    12. Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2017. "Breadth of external knowledge sourcing and product innovation: The moderating role of strategic human resource practices," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 261-272.
    13. Vassallo, Jarrod P. & Banerjee, Sourindra & Zaman, Hasanuzzaman & Prabhu, Jaideep C., 2023. "Design thinking and public sector innovation: The divergent effects of risk-taking, cognitive empathy and emotional empathy on individual performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    14. Elias G. Carayannis & Luca Dezi & Gianluca Gregori & Ernesto Calo, 2022. "Smart Environments and Techno-centric and Human-Centric Innovations for Industry and Society 5.0: A Quintuple Helix Innovation System View Towards Smart, Sustainable, and Inclusive Solutions," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 13(2), pages 926-955, June.
    15. Paris Chrysos, 2018. "Empathy in the business model: how Facebook and Google Maps manage external problem-solving processes," Working Papers halshs-01897205, HAL.
    16. Fiedler, Jakob & Schorn, André & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2023. "The influence of risk classification and community affiliation on the acceptance of user-innovated medical devices," Working Papers 115, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    17. von Hippel, Eric & Kaulartz, Sandro, 2021. "Next-generation consumer innovation search: Identifying early-stage need-solution pairs on the web," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    18. Johann Piet Hausberg & Peter S. H. Leeflang, 2019. "Absorbing Integration: Empirical Evidence On The Mediating Role Of Absorptive Capacity Between Functional-/Cross-Functional Integration And Innovation Performance," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 23(06), pages 1-37, August.
    19. Pelau Corina & Serban Daniela & Chinie Alexandra Catalina, 2018. "The influence of personality types on the impulsive buying behavior of a consumer," Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence, Sciendo, vol. 12(1), pages 751-759, May.
    20. Orelj, Ana & Torfason, Magnus Thor, 2022. "They didn't ask: Online innovation communities as a latent dynamic capability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).

    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:eee:respol:v:50:y:2021:i:8:s0048733320301463. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/respol .

    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.