IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v60y2014i4p1063-1081.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Integrating Problem Solvers from Analogous Markets in New Product Ideation

Author

Listed:
  • Nikolaus Franke

    (Institute for Entrepreneurship and Innovation, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, A-1020 Vienna, Austria)

  • Marion K. Poetz

    (Department of Innovation and Organizational Economics, Copenhagen Business School, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark)

  • Martin Schreier

    (Institute for Marketing Management, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business, A-1020 Vienna, Austria)

Abstract

Who provides better inputs to new product ideation tasks, problem solvers with expertise in the area for which new products are to be developed or problem solvers from “analogous” markets that are distant but share an analogous problem or need? Conventional wisdom appears to suggest that target market expertise is indispensable, which is why most managers searching for new ideas tend to stay within their own market context even when they do search outside their firms' boundaries. However, in a unique symmetric experiment that isolates the effect of market origin, we find evidence for the opposite: Although solutions provided by problem solvers from analogous markets show lower potential for immediate use, they demonstrate substantially higher levels of novelty. Also, compared to established novelty drivers, this effect appears highly relevant from a managerial perspective: we find that including problem solvers from analogous markets versus the target market accounts for almost two-thirds of the well-known effect of involving lead users instead of average problem solvers. This effect is further amplified when the analogous distance between the markets increases, i.e., when searching in far versus near analogous markets. Finally, results indicate that the analogous market effect is particularly strong in the upper tail of the novelty distribution, which again underscores the effect's practical importance. All of this suggests that it might pay to systematically search across firm-external sources of innovation that were formerly out of scope for most managers.Data, as supplemental material, are available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1805. This paper was accepted by Lee Fleming, entrepreneurship and innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Nikolaus Franke & Marion K. Poetz & Martin Schreier, 2014. "Integrating Problem Solvers from Analogous Markets in New Product Ideation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 60(4), pages 1063-1081, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:60:y:2014:i:4:p:1063-1081
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2013.1805
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1805
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2013.1805?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Giovanni Gavetti & Daniel A. Levinthal & Jan W. Rivkin, 2005. "Strategy making in novel and complex worlds: the power of analogy," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(8), pages 691-712, August.
    2. Eric von Hippel, 1986. "Lead Users: A Source of Novel Product Concepts," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 32(7), pages 791-805, July.
    3. James G. March, 1991. "Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 2(1), pages 71-87, February.
    4. Pino G. Audia & Jack A. Goncalo, 2007. "Past Success and Creativity over Time: A Study of Inventors in the Hard Disk Drive Industry," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(1), pages 1-15, January.
    5. Gary L. Lilien & Pamela D. Morrison & Kathleen Searls & Mary Sonnack & Eric von Hippel, 2002. "Performance Assessment of the Lead User Idea-Generation Process for New Product Development," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(8), pages 1042-1059, August.
    6. Richard R. Nelson, 1982. "The Role of Knowledge in R&D Efficiency," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 97(3), pages 453-470.
    7. C. Page Moreau & Darren W. Dahl, 2005. "Designing the Solution: The Impact of Constraints on Consumers' Creativity," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 32(1), pages 13-22, June.
    8. Schulze, Anja & Hoegl, Martin, 2008. "Organizational knowledge creation and the generation of new product ideas: A behavioral approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 1742-1750, December.
    9. Christian Terwiesch & Yi Xu, 2008. "Innovation Contests, Open Innovation, and Multiagent Problem Solving," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(9), pages 1529-1543, September.
    10. Franke, Nikolaus & Shah, Sonali, 2003. "How communities support innovative activities: an exploration of assistance and sharing among end-users," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 157-178, January.
    11. Lars Bo Jeppesen & Karim R. Lakhani, 2010. "Marginality and Problem-Solving Effectiveness in Broadcast Search," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 21(5), pages 1016-1033, October.
    12. Roger J. Volkema, 1983. "Problem Formulation in Planning and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 639-652, June.
    13. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    14. Jasjit Singh & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(1), pages 41-56, January.
    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. Antonello Cammarano & Vincenzo Varriale & Francesca Michelino & Mauro Caputo, 2022. "Open and Crowd-Based Platforms: Impact on Organizational and Market Performance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-26, February.
    2. Amrita Lahiri & Anu Wadhwa, 2021. "When do serial entrepreneurs found innovative ventures? Evidence from patent data," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 1973-1993, December.
    3. Jindong Qin & Pan Zheng & Xiaojun Wang, 2024. "Product Redesign and Innovation Based on Online Reviews: A Multistage Combined Search Method," INFORMS Journal on Computing, INFORMS, vol. 36(3), pages 742-765, May.
    4. Boons, Mark & Stam, Daan, 2019. "Crowdsourcing for innovation: How related and unrelated perspectives interact to increase creative performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1758-1770.
    5. 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).
    6. Homfeldt, Felix & Rese, Alexandra & Simon, Franz, 2019. "Suppliers versus start-ups: Where do better innovation ideas come from?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1738-1757.
    7. Parker, Owen N. & Mui, Rachel & Bhawe, Nachiket & Semadeni, Matthew, 2022. "Insight or ignorance: How collaborative history in a workgroup fits with project type to shape performance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 154-167.
    8. Prandelli, Emanuela & Pasquini, Martina & Verona, Gianmario, 2016. "In user's shoes: An experimental design on the role of perspective taking in discovering entrepreneurial opportunities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 287-301.
    9. Francesco Cappa & Federica Rosso & Antonio Capaldo, 2020. "Visitor-Sensing: Involving the Crowd in Cultural Heritage Organizations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-14, February.
    10. Vandor, Peter & Franke, Nikolaus, 2016. "See Paris and… found a business? The impact of cross-cultural experience on opportunity recognition capabilities," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 388-407.
    11. Steils, Nadia & Hanine, Salwa, 2019. "Recruiting valuable participants in online IDEA generation: The role of brief instructions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 14-25.
    12. Schemmann, Brita & Herrmann, Andrea M. & Chappin, Maryse M.H. & Heimeriks, Gaston J., 2016. "Crowdsourcing ideas: Involving ordinary users in the ideation phase of new product development," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1145-1154.
    13. Claire Heeryung Kim & Kelly B. Herd & H. Shanker Krishnan, 2023. "The creative touch: the influence of haptics on creativity," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 113-124, March.
    14. Antonia Madrid-Guijarro & Dominique Philippe Martin & Domingo García-Pérez-de-Lema, 2021. "Capacity of open innovation activities in fostering product and process innovation in manufacturing SMEs," Review of Managerial Science, Springer, vol. 15(7), pages 2137-2164, October.
    15. Ogink, Ruben H.A.J. & Goossen, Martin C. & Romme, A. Georges L. & Akkermans, Henk, 2023. "Mechanisms in open innovation: A review and synthesis of the literature," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    16. Tat Koon Koh & Muller Y. M. Cheung, 2022. "Seeker Exemplars and Quantitative Ideation Outcomes in Crowdsourcing Contests," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(1), pages 265-284, March.
    17. Yang, Feifei & Yang, Miles M., 2022. "Does cross-cultural experience matter for new venture performance? The moderating role of socio-cognitive traits," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 38-51.
    18. Stock, Carolin & Gierl, Heribert, 2015. "It’s a consumer’s idea, you must like it: The efficacy of created-by-consumer cues in market communication," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 69(4), pages 371-395.

    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. Mahr, Dominik & Lievens, Annouk, 2012. "Virtual lead user communities: Drivers of knowledge creation for innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 167-177.
    2. Sam Arts & Lee Fleming, 2018. "Paradise of Novelty—Or Loss of Human Capital? Exploring New Fields and Inventive Output," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1074-1092, December.
    3. Aaron K. Chatterji & Kira Fabrizio, 2012. "How Do Product Users Influence Corporate Invention?," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 23(4), pages 971-987, August.
    4. Claussen, Jörg & Halbinger, Maria A., 2021. "The role of pre-innovation platform activity for diffusion success: Evidence from consumer innovations on a 3D printing platform," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(8).
    5. Schweisfurth, Tim G., 2017. "Comparing internal and external lead users as sources of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 238-248.
    6. Francesco Paolo Appio & Antonella Martini & Silvia Massa & Stefania Testa, 2016. "Unveiling the intellectual origins of Social Media-based innovation: insights from a bibliometric approach," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 355-388, July.
    7. Tat Koon Koh, 2019. "Adopting Seekers’ Solution Exemplars in Crowdsourcing Ideation Contests: Antecedents and Consequences," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(2), pages 486-506, June.
    8. 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.
    9. Franke, Nikolaus & von Hippel, Eric & Schreier, Martin, 2005. "Finding commercially attractive user innovations: A test of lead user theory," Working papers 4536-05, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Sloan School of Management.
    10. Barry L. Bayus, 2013. "Crowdsourcing New Product Ideas over Time: An Analysis of the Dell IdeaStorm Community," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(1), pages 226-244, June.
    11. Raffaele Conti & Alfonso Gambardella & Myriam Mariani, 2014. "Learning to Be Edison: Inventors, Organizations, and Breakthrough Inventions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(3), pages 833-849, June.
    12. Keyvan Vakili & Sarah Kaplan, 2021. "Organizing for innovation: A contingency view on innovative team configuration," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(6), pages 1159-1183, June.
    13. Adrián Kovács & Bart Looy & Bruno Cassiman, 2015. "Exploring the scope of open innovation: a bibliometric review of a decade of research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(3), pages 951-983, September.
    14. Lettl, Christopher & Rost, Katja & von Wartburg, Iwan, 2009. "Why are some independent inventors 'heroes' and others 'hobbyists'? The moderating role of technological diversity and specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 243-254, March.
    15. Linda Hamdi-Kidar & Cyrielle Vellera, 2012. "What drives lead users to become users entrepreneurs ? an exploratory study of motivations," Post-Print halshs-00851319, HAL.
    16. Piller, Frank & Vossen, Alexander & Ihl, Christoph, 2012. "From Social Media to Social Product Development: The Impact of Social Media on Co-Creation of Innovation," Die Unternehmung - Swiss Journal of Business Research and Practice, Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co. KG, vol. 66(1), pages 7-27.
    17. Hasan, Sharique & Koning, Rembrand, 2019. "Conversations and idea generation: Evidence from a field experiment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    18. Oliveira, Pedro & von Hippel, Eric, 2011. "Users as service innovators: The case of banking services," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(6), pages 806-818, July.
    19. Peter Wehnert & Christoph Kollwitz & Christofer Daiberl & Barbara Dinter & Markus Beckmann, 2018. "Capturing the Bigger Picture? Applying Text Analytics to Foster Open Innovation Processes for Sustainability-Oriented Innovation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-24, October.
    20. Preißner, Stephanie & Raasch, Christina & Schweisfurth, Tim, 2017. "Is necessity the mother of disruption?," Kiel Working Papers 2097, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:60:y:2014:i:4:p:1063-1081. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.