IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/techno/v98y2020ics0166497218308162.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Revisiting the role of modular innovation in technological radicalness and architectural change of products: The case of Tesla X and Roomba

Author

Listed:
  • Habib, Tufail
  • Kristiansen, Jimmi Normann
  • Rana, Mohammad Bakhtiar
  • Ritala, Paavo

Abstract

The management literature defines modular innovation as a way to make technological changes in product modules that does not necessarily change the product architecture. However, engineering science shows that new product modules not only change the product architecture, but they can also be used for technologically radical next generation products. Therefore, there seems to be a misalignment in how the role of modular innovation is seen as an innovation management phenomenon and the actual practice of product design and engineering. We revisit the role of modular innovation by combining management and engineering approaches. We demonstrate the applicability of this approach through two cases that utilize patent data of two recent technologically innovative products: Tesla's Model X and iRobot's Roomba automated vacuum cleaner. The examples show, in detail, how the changes in product modules and functions have led to broader changes at the system architecture level, leading to new functionalities. The findings contribute to the innovation management literature by identifying a more nuanced role of modular innovation by embedding it in the product architecture, thus broadening the discussion on architectural innovation and technological radicalness.

Suggested Citation

  • Habib, Tufail & Kristiansen, Jimmi Normann & Rana, Mohammad Bakhtiar & Ritala, Paavo, 2020. "Revisiting the role of modular innovation in technological radicalness and architectural change of products: The case of Tesla X and Roomba," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:techno:v:98:y:2020:i:c:s0166497218308162
    DOI: 10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102163
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166497218308162
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102163?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. Pimmler, Thomas U. (Thomas Udo) & Eppinger, Steven D., 1994. "Integration analysis of product decompositions," Working papers 3690-94., Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    2. Dow, James & Werlang, Sergio Ribeiro da Costa, 1992. "Uncertainty Aversion, Risk Aversion, and the Optimal Choice of Portfolio," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 197-204, January.
    3. Eppinger, Steven D. & Browning, Tyson R., 2012. "Design Structure Matrix Methods and Applications," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262017520, April.
    4. Sofy Carayannopoulos, 2009. "How Technology–Based New Firms Leverage Newness and Smallness to Commercialize Disruptive Technologies," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 33(2), pages 419-438, March.
    5. Nicholas Argyres & Lyda Bigelow & Jack A. Nickerson, 2015. "Dominant designs, innovation shocks, and the follower's dilemma," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 216-234, February.
    6. den Hartigh, Erik & Ortt, J. Roland & van de Kaa, Geerten & Stolwijk, Claire C.M., 2016. "Platform control during battles for market dominance: The case of Apple versus IBM in the early personal computer industry," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 4-12.
    7. Hofman, Erwin & Halman, Johannes I.M. & Looy, Bart van, 2016. "Do design rules facilitate or complicate architectural innovation in innovation alliance networks?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1436-1448.
    8. Park, Woo-Yong & Ro, Young K. & Kim, Namwoon, 2018. "Architectural innovation and the emergence of a dominant design: The effects of strategic sourcing on performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 326-341.
    9. Sendil K. Ethiraj & Daniel Levinthal & Rishi R. Roy, 2008. "The Dual Role of Modularity: Innovation and Imitation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(5), pages 939-955, May.
    10. Thomas Magnusson & Göran Lindström & Christian Berggren, 2003. "Architectural Or Modular Innovation? Managing Discontinuous Product Development In Response To Challenging Environmental Performance Targets," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 7(01), pages 1-26.
    11. Abernathy, William J. & Clark, Kim B., 1985. "Innovation: Mapping the winds of creative destruction," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 3-22, February.
    12. Robert D. Dewar & Jane E. Dutton, 1986. "The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(11), pages 1422-1433, November.
    13. Ulrich, Karl, 1995. "The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 419-440, May.
    14. Henry Chesbrough & Richard S. Rosenbloom, 2002. "The role of the business model in capturing value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporation's technology spin-off companies," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(3), pages 529-555, June.
    15. Xie, Zongjie & Hall, Jeremy & McCarthy, Ian P. & Skitmore, Martin & Shen, Liyin, 2016. "Standardization efforts: The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search processes and innovation outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 69-78.
    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. Fu, Shihui & Sun, Yi & Gao, Xue, 2022. "Balancing openness and control to improve the performance of crowdsourcing contests for product innovation: A configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    2. Nicholas Burton & Peter Galvin, 2022. "The effect of technology and regulation on the co-evolution of product and industry architecture," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(4), pages 1056-1085.
    3. Dan Dan & Yihang Zhao & Mingshan Wei & Xuehui Wang, 2023. "Review of Thermal Management Technology for Electric Vehicles," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-38, June.
    4. Tikas, Gaurav Dilip, 2023. "Team innovation capability: Scale development and validation," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).

    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. Babak Heydari & Mohsen Mosleh & Kia Dalili, 2016. "From Modular to Distributed Open Architectures: A Unified Decision Framework," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 252-266, May.
    2. Anna Cabigiosu & Arnaldo Camuffo, 2012. "Beyond the “Mirroring” Hypothesis: Product Modularity and Interorganizational Relations in the Air Conditioning Industry," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(3), pages 686-703, June.
    3. Anna Cabigiosu, 2018. "When do modular dominant designs emerge? A theoretical framework," Working Papers 05, Venice School of Management - Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    4. Manuel E. Sosa & Steven D. Eppinger & Craig M. Rowles, 2004. "The Misalignment of Product Architecture and Organizational Structure in Complex Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(12), pages 1674-1689, December.
    5. Maxim Kotsemir & Alexander Abroskin & Dirk Meissner, 2013. "Innovation concepts and typology – an evolutionary discussion," HSE Working papers WP BRP 05/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    6. Sheth, Ananya & Sinfield, Joseph V., 2022. "An analytical framework to compare innovation strategies and identify simple rules," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    7. Scaringella, Laurent & Burtschell, François, 2017. "The challenges of radical innovation in Iran: Knowledge transfer and absorptive capacity highlights — Evidence from a joint venture in the construction sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 151-169.
    8. Jimmi Normann Kristiansen & Frank Gertsen, 2015. "Is Radical Innovation Management Misunderstood? Problematising The Radical Innovation Discipline," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 19(06), pages 1-23, December.
    9. Alan MacCormack & John Rusnak & Carliss Y. Baldwin, 2006. "Exploring the Structure of Complex Software Designs: An Empirical Study of Open Source and Proprietary Code," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(7), pages 1015-1030, July.
    10. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    11. Fixson, Sebastian K. & Park, Jin-Kyu, 2008. "The power of integrality: Linkages between product architecture, innovation, and industry structure," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(8), pages 1296-1316, September.
    12. Raja Roy & Susan K. Cohen, 2017. "Stock of downstream complementary assets as a catalyst for product innovation during technological change in the U.S. machine tool industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(6), pages 1253-1267, June.
    13. Kaushik Sinha & Seok‐Youn Han & Eun Suk Suh, 2020. "Design structure matrix‐based modularization approach for complex systems with multiple design constraints," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 211-220, March.
    14. David A. Broniatowski, 2018. "Building the tower without climbing it: Progress in engineering systems," Systems Engineering, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 21(3), pages 259-281, May.
    15. Gawer, Annabelle, 2014. "Bridging differing perspectives on technological platforms: Toward an integrative framework," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(7), pages 1239-1249.
    16. Sköld, Martin, 2008. "Knowledge Development Patterns In Radically New Product Architectures," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2008:8, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 18 Nov 2008.
    17. Henning Skirde & Wolfgang Kersten & Meike Schröder, 2016. "Measuring the Cost Effects of Modular Product Architectures — A Conceptual Approach," International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management (IJITM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 13(04), pages 1-23, August.
    18. Angel Sevil & Alfonso Cruz & Tomas Reyes & Roberto Vassolo, 2022. "When Being Large Is Not an Advantage: How Innovation Impacts the Sustainability of Firm Performance in Natural Resource Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(23), pages 1-20, December.
    19. Gatti, Corrado & Volpe, Loredana & Vagnani, Gianluca, 2015. "Interdependence among productive activities: Implications for exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 711-722.
    20. Köhler, Christian & Sofka, Wolfgang & Grimpe, Christoph, 2009. "Selectivity in search strategies for innovation: from incremental to radical, from manufacturing to services," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-066, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.

    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:techno:v:98:y:2020:i:c:s0166497218308162. 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.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/01664972 .

    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.