Product Innovation Processes Conceptual and Methodological Considerations

136 Pages·2007·0.6 MB·English

by  Sven Andersson

2007:07
LICENTIATE T H E S I S
Product Innovation Processes
Product Innovation Processes
CCoonncceeppttuuaall aanndd MMeetthhooddoollooggiiccaall CCoonnssiiddeerraattiioonnss
This is NOT an innovation?
Sven Andersson
Luleå University of Technology
Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences
AcScovuennt inAgn adned rCsosontnro l
Luleå University of Technology
2007:07|: 02-757|: -c -- 07⁄07 -- 
Division of Business Administration and Management
971 81 Luleå

Product Innovation Processes
Conceptual and Methodological Considerations
This is NOT an innovation?
Sven Andersson
Luleå University of Technology
Department of Business Administration and Social Sciences
Accounting and Control
971 81 Luleå

ABSTRACT
This thesis addresses the social dimension of individuals engaging in the product
innovation process in order to develop and choose techniques for knowledge creation
about the social evolvement of a product innovation. The social dimensions of
product innovation processes are particular interesting, since many firms today
organize their processes by combining individuals from different functions and
knowledge areas. The main argument is that decreasing the product’s time to market
saves costs through divergent perspectives of the product innovation early in the
product innovation process; thus, understanding the social dimension may contribute
to improving a firm’s product innovation process. This is addressed by (1) developing
a conceptual model of the product innovation process in respect to the dynamic
interplay between individuals in terms of social and cognitive dimensions; (2)
formulating a research plan for a significant test of the model; (3) empirically testing a
significant part of the research plan on one individual participating in a product
innovation process; and (4) developing a research plan based on this test. In this study,
development of the conceptual model is based on a literature review. The significant
test and the formulation of a research plan are based on the repertory grid technique,
social network analysis, and alter-ego network analysis in order to understand if these
techniques could be applied to the central concepts, which are, frame of reference,
thought, action, interaction, and structures. The significant test indicated a complex
relationship between the central concepts, which implies a need for researchers to
combine techniques and to participate within the process.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The physical result of a licentiate thesis may be argued to be a product innovation,
perhaps not in the format of a book but in terms of its unique content, which is based
on a recombination of knowledge areas and thus an innovation by definition. This
would logically imply that the process of writing (an action) and thinking about the
content of the thesis would be a result of the product innovation process. As in many
product innovation processes, I have interacted with other individuals whom I
perceive as significant in order to expand my understanding (frame of reference)
within this field of knowledge.
Among all significant individuals with whom I have interacted, I would like to give
my appreciation to those who have had the deepest impact on my actions and way of
thinking. First of all, I would like to thank my supervisors, PhD. Anders Nilsson and
Professor Einar Häckner, for their valuable comments, support, and patience. Another
person who largely contributed in the early stages of this thesis is PhD. Mats
Westerberg, who inspires me through his genuine interest and enthusiasm. There are
also several individuals who have contributed to my work in different ways,
commenting in conferences, seminars, and during coffee breaks. Even the smallest
comment could alter my perspective of what is fundamental, so thanks to all of you.
Like life in general, writing a thesis has its ups and downs. To balance, I find strength
in my interests, my friends, and especially my family. Without my constant friendly
battles with my father, the encouragement of my mother, and the laughs with my
indecisive sister, I do not think that I would have found the strength to think, write,
rethink, and rewrite. I would also like to mention my uncle, whose calmness helps to
balance the pace of life. Thanks to all of you!
I would like to conclude with words of wisdom from Matthew Arnold (1822 - 1888),
who insightfully stated:
The freethinking of one age is the common sense of the next.
I hope that this brick of knowledge will make a small contribution to the common
sense of future practitioners in product innovation processes. I hope to increase their
knowledge about the social dimensions of product innovation processes and be
reflected in action when practicing the art of innovation.
Luleå
Sven Andersson

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION............................................................................................1
1.1 THE SOCIAL PROCESS OF PRODUCT INNOVATION............................................................2
1.2 THOUGHT, ACTION, AND INTERACTION IN PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESSES.............3
1.3 RESEARCH PURPOSE........................................................................................................4
1.4 OUTLINE OF THIS THESIS.................................................................................................5
2 SCIENTIFIC POSITIONING AND THESIS REALIZATION...............................7
2.1 ONTOLOGICAL POSITIONING...........................................................................................7
2.2 EPISTEMOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS OF INNOVATION....................................................8
2.3 METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS CHARACTERIZING THIS THESIS............................9
2.4 RESEARCH DESIGN.........................................................................................................10
2.5 LITERATURE REVIEW.....................................................................................................10
3 CONCEPTUALIZING THE PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESS...................13
3.1 THE PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESS...........................................................................13
3.2 COGNITION IN THE PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESS...................................................14
3.3 PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY....................................17
3.4 INSTITUTIONS AND INSTITUTIONALIZATION IN THOUGHT AND ACTION.......................18
3.4.1 Fundamental features of institutions.........................................................................19
3.4.2 Institutionalization in thought and action..................................................................20
3.5 INDIVIDUAL FRAMES OF REFERENCE IN TERMS OF CONTENT AND STRENGTH...............24
3.5.1 The innovation process in terms of content..................................................................24
3.5.2 The innovation process in terms of strength.................................................................27
3.6 THE DYNAMIC UNFOLDING OF PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESSES...............................29
3.6.1 A model of unfolding social and cognitive dimensions in product innovation processes..............31
4 TOWARDS A RESEARCH PLAN OF THE SOCIAL AND COGNITIVE
DIMENSIONS IN PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESSES..............................35
4.1 FOUNDATIONS IN THE REPERTORY GRID TECHNIQUE..................................................35
4.1.1 Performing a repertory grid....................................................................................37
4.2 FOUNDATIONS OF SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS.............................................................39
4.3 FUNDAMENTALS OF ALTER-EGO NETWORK ANALYSIS....................................................40
4.3.1 Linking techniques to the product innovation process.....................................................41
5 TESTING A SIGNIFICANT PART OF THE RESEARCH PLAN........................43
5.1 SELECTION OF A PRODUCT INNOVATION PROCESS........................................................43
5.2 TESTING THE REPERTORY GRID TECHNIQUE................................................................45
5.2.1 Conducting the main test of the repertory grid technique.................................................50
5.2.2 PCA of the data when using the Flexigrid program......................................................52
5.2.3 Conducting the follow-up interview..........................................................................52
5.3 TESTING THE SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS.....................................................................53
5.4 TESTING THE ALTER-EGO NETWORK ANALYSIS..............................................................55
6 C4-DTN – ANALYZING THE SIGNIFICANT TEST.........................................57
6.1 THEC4-DTN INNOVATION PROJECT...........................................................................57
6.2 THE PROJECT MANAGER’S FRAME OF REFERENCE ABOUT THE C4-DTN PROJECT
ACTIVITIES.................................................................................................................................58
6.2.1 Introducing the constructs......................................................................................58
6.2.2 Four dimensions of the C4-DTN project activities.......................................................60
6.3 SOCIAL NETWORK ANALYSIS ABOUT THE C4-DTN PROJECT.........................................64
6.4 ALTER-EGO NETWORK ANALYSIS ABOUT THE C4-DTN PROJECT..................................65
6.5 CONCLUDING REFLECTIONS ABOUT THE METHODS USED..............................................65
7 FORMULATING A RESEARCH PLAN OF PRODUCT INNOVATION
PROCESSES...................................................................................................67
7.1 FORMULATING A FOCUS OF THE RESEARCH PLAN..........................................................67
7.2 CONCEPTUAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE RESEARCH PLAN..............................................71
7.3 HOW TO CAPTURE EVOLVING PRODUCT INNOVATION..................................................77
7.3.1 Interview..........................................................................................................78
7.3.2 Repertorygrid....................................................................................................79
7.3.3 Social network analysis.........................................................................................80
7.3.4 Alter-ego network analysis.....................................................................................81
7.3.5 Observation......................................................................................................82
7.3.6 Interconnectedness of used techniques........................................................................83
7.4 METHODOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS IN THE RESEARCH PLAN.....................................83
7.4.1 A perspective of social processes of product innovation processes.........................................84
7.4.2 Problems when studying social processes of product innovation processes...............................85
7.4.3 Selecting a product innovation processes.....................................................................85
7.5 TENTATIVE IMPLICATIONS FROM KNOWLEDGE OF EARLY PHASES..................................87
7.5.1 Concludingremarks.............................................................................................87
REFERENCES:.....................................................................................................89
APPENDIX 1: Kelly’s fundamental postulate and corollaries.....................................................97
APPENDIX 2: Reduced elements used......................................................................................99
APPENDIX 3: Guidelines for the structured interview............................................................101
APPENDIX 4: Data generated based on the repertory grid technique.....................................108
APPENDIX 5: Guidelines for the structured interview............................................................116
APPENDIX 6: Ascribed meaning to generated constructs........................................................123