Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Generating new product ideas: An initial investigation of the role of market information and organizational characteristics

  • Research note
  • Published:
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

Although product innovation is widely recognized as crucial to the success of organizations, the literature still contains certain gaps that limit our understanding of successful product innovation. These gaps include a lack of research employing a decompositional approach (i,e., analysis of the drivers at each stage of the process) to studying product innovation and a related lack of research investigating the effect of organizational characteristics on specific stages of the product innovation process. The authors attempt to close these gaps by developing and testing a model examining the moderating effects of organizational characteristics on the relationship between the amount of market information gathered and the number of new product ideas generated by work groups in organizations. The study findings provide insights into the types of organizational structure and climate characteristics that can have an impact on the relationship between amount of market information and new product idea generation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aaby, Nils-Erik and Richard Discenza. 1995. “Strategic Marketing and New Product Development: An Integrated Approach.”Marketing Intelligence and Planning 13 (September) 30–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Adams, Marjorie E., George S. Day, and Deborah Dougherty. 1998. “Enhancing New Product Development Performance: An Organizational Learning Perspective.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 15 (July): 403–422.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, Leona S. and Stephen G. West. 1991.Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aiken, M., S. B. Bacharach, and J. L. French. 1980. “Organizational Structure, Work Processes, and Proposal Making in Administrative Bureaucracies.”Academy of Management Journal 23 (October): 631–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and J. Hage. 1968. “Organizational Independence and Intra-Organizational Structure.”American Sociological Review 33 (December): 912–930.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1971. “The Organic Organization and Innovation.”Sociology 5 (January): 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amabile, Teresa. 1997. “Motivating Creativity in Organizations: On Doing What You Love and Loving What You Do.”California Management Review 40 (Fall): 39–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, Chris and Donald Schön. 1978.Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima, Kwaku. 1995. “An Exploratory Analysis of the Impact of Market Orientation on New Product Performance: A Contingency Approach.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 12 (December): 275–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1996. “Market Orientation and Innovation.”Journal of Business Research 35 (February): 93–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barney, Jay. 1991. “Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage.”Journal of Management 17 (1):99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beyer, J. M. and H. M. Trice. 1978.Implementing Change. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booz, Allen, and Hamilton, Inc.. 1982.New Product Management for the 1980’s. New York: Booz, Allen, and Hamilton, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns T. and G. M. Stalker. 1961.The Management of Innovation. London: Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calantone, Roger and Robert G. Cooper. 1981. “New Product Scenarios: Prospects for Success.”Journal of Marketing 45 (Spring): 48–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Churchill, Gilbert A., Jr. 1979. “A Paradigm for Developing Better Measures of Marketing Constructs.”Journal of Marketing Research 16 (February): 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Connoly, Terry, L. M. Jessup and Joseph S. Valacich. 1990. “Effects of Anonymity and Evaluative Tone on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups.”Management Science 36 (6): 698–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conway, H. Allan and Norman W. McGuinness. 1986. “Idea Generation in Technology-Based Firms.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 3 (December): 276–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cooper, Robert G. 1979. “The Dimensions of Industrial New Product Success and Failure.”Journal of Marketing 43 (Summer): 93–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — 1980. “Project New Prod: Factors in New Product Success.”European Journal of Marketing 14 (5/6): 277–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, Christopher J. Easingwood, Scott Edgett, Elko J. Kleinschmidt, and Chris Storey. 1994. “What Distinguishes the Top Performing New Products in Financial Services.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 11 (September): 281–299.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and Elko J. Kleinschmidt. 1986. “An Investigation Into the New Product Process: Steps, Deficiencies, and Impact.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 3 (March): 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1987. “New Products: What Separates Winners From Losers?.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 4 (March): 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ——. 1993. “Screening New Products for Potential Winners.”Long Range Planning 26 (December): 74–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, C. Merle. 1992.New Products Management. Boston: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daft, Richard L., Juhani Sormunen, and Don Parks. 1988. “Chief Executive Scanning Environmental Characteristics.”Strategic Management Journal 9 (March/April): 123–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damanpour, Fariborz. 1987. “The Adoption of Technological, Administrative, and Ancillary Innovations: Impact of Organizational Factors.”Journal of Management 13 (Winter): 675–688.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1991. “Organizational Innovation: A Meta-Analysis of Effects of Determinants and Moderators.”Academy of Management Journal 34 (September): 555–559.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 1996. “Organizational Complexity and Innovation: Developing and Testing Multiple Contingency Models.”Management Science 42 (May): 693–716.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, George S. 1992. “Continuous Learning About Markets.”Planning Review 20 (September–October): 47–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deshpandé, Rohit and Frederick E. Webster, Jr. 1989. “Organizational Culture and Marketing: Defining the Research Agenda.”Journal of Marketing 53 (January): 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diehl, M. and W. Stroebe. 1987. “Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: Toward a Solution of a Riddle.”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 53 (March): 497–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R. B. 1976. “The Ambidextrous Organization: Designing Dual Structures for Innovation.” InThe Management of Organization: Strategy and Implementation. Eds. R. H. Kilmann, L. R. Pondy, and D. P. Slevin. New York: North Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebadi, Y. M. and J. Utterback. 1984. “The Effects of Communication on Technological Innovation.”Management Science 30 (May): 572–585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Felberg, Jeff D. and David A. DeMarco. 1992. “New Idea Enhancement at Amoco Chemical: An Early Report From a New System.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 9 (December): 278–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fiol, C. Marlene and Marjorie A. Lyles. 1985. “Organizational Learning.”Academy of Management Review 10 (October) 803–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gagliano, Caren Calish. 1985. “How to Mine and Refine New Product Ideas.”Business Marketing (November): 102–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerbing, David W. and James C. Anderson. 1988. “An Updated Paradigm for Scale Development Incorporating Unidimensionality and Its Assessment.”Journal of Marketing Research 25 (May): 186–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Glazer, Rashi. 1991. “Marketing in an Information-Intensive, Environment: Strategic Implications of Knowledge as an Asset.”Journal of Marketing 55 (October): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hage, J. and M. Aiken. 1967. “Program Change and Organizational Properties: A Comparative Analysis.”American Journal of Sociology 72 (March): 503–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hair, Joseph F., Jr. Rolph E. Anderson, Ronald L. Tatham, and William C. Black. 1995.Multivariate Data Analysis With Readings. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, Edward and Russell Mills. 1970. “Patterns of Organizational Adaptation: A Political Perspective.” InPower in Organizations. Ed. Mayer N. Zeld. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henard, David H. and David M. Szymanski. 2001. “Why Some New Products Are More Successful Than Others: A Meta Analysis of the Empirical Evidence.”Journal of Marketing Research 38 (August): forthcoming.

  • Herstatt, Cornelius and Eric von Hippel. 1992. “Developing New Product Concepts via the Lead User Method: A Case Study in a ‘Low Tech’ Field.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 9 (September): 213–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber, George P. 1991. “Organizational Learning: The Contributing Processes and the Literatures.”Organization Science 2 (February): 88–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaworski, Bernard J. and Ajay K. Kohli. 1993. “Market Orientation: Antecedents and Consequences.”Journal of Marketing 57 (July): 23–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kanter, Rosabeth M. 1986. “Creating the Creative Environment.”Management Review 75 (February): 11–2.

    Google Scholar 

  • — 1988. “When a Thousand Flowers Bloom: Structure, Collective, and Social Conditions for Innovation in Organization.” InResearch in Organizational Behavior. Eds. B. M. Staw and L. L. Cummings. Greenwhich, CT: JAI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimberly, J. R. and M. J. Evanisko. 1981. “Organizational Innovation: The Influence of Individual, Organizational, and Contextual Factors on Hospital Adoption of Technological and Administrative Innovations.”Academy of Management Journal 24 (December): 689–713.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, N. and N. Anderson. 1990. “Innovation in Working Groups.” InInnovation and Creativity at Work. Eds. M. A. West and J. L. Farr. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maidique, Modesto A. and Billie Jo Zirger. 1984. “A Study of Success and Failure in Product Innovation: The Case of The US Electronics Industry.”IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management EM-31 (November): 192–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Massetti, Brenda. 1996. “An Empirical Examination of the Value of Creativity Support Systems on Idea Generation.”MIS Quarterly 20 (March): 83–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGuinness, Norman. 1990. “New Product Idea Activities in Large Technology Based Firms.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 7 (September) 173–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, Danny and P. H. Friesen. 1982. “Innovation in Conservative and Entrepreneurial Firms: Two Models of Strategic Momentum.”Strategic Management Journal 3 (January): 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Montoya-Weiss, Mitzi M. and Roger A. Calantone. 1994. “Determinants of New Product Performance: A Review and Meta-Analysis.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 11 (November): 397–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman, Christine. 1995. “Organizational Market Information Processes: Cultural Antecedents and New Product Outcomes.”Journal of Marketing Research 32 (August): 318–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neter, John, William Wasserman, and Michael H. Kutner. 1989.Applied Linear Regression Models. 2d ed. Boston: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nevens, T. Michael, Gregory L. Summe, and Bro Uttal. 1990. “Commercializing Technology: What the Best Companies Do.”Harvard Business Review 68 (May–June): 154–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nonaka, Ikujiro. 1991. “The Knowledge-Creating Company.”Harvard Business Review 69 (November–December): 96–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, Jum and Gary Bernstein. 1994.Psychometric Theory. 2d ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ottum, Brian D. and William L. Moore. 1997. “The Role of Market Information in New Product Success/Failure.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 14 (July): 258–273.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavia, Teresa M. 1991. “The Early Stages of New Product Development in Entrepreneurial High-Tech Firms.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 8 (March): 18–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Payne, R. 1990. “The Effectiveness of Research Teams: A Review.” InInnovation and Creativity at Work. Eds. M. A. West and J. L. Farr. Chichester, UK: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pierce, J. L. and A. L. Delbeq. 1977. “Organizational Structure, Individual Attitudes, and Innovation.”Academy of Management Review 2 (January): 26–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quinn, James B. 1992.Intelligent Enterprise. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothwell, R. 1972. “Factors for Success in Industrial Innovations.”Project SAPPHO—A Comparative Study of Success and Failure in Industrial Innovations. Brighton, UK: SPRU.

    Google Scholar 

  • —, C. Freeman, A. Horley, V.I.P. Jervis, A. B. Robertson, and J. Townsend. 1974. “SAPPHO Updated—Project SAPPHO Phase II.”Research Policy 3 (March): 258–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Senge, Peter M. 1990.The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slater, Stanley F. and John C. Narver. 1995. “Market Orientation and the Learning Organization.”Journal of Marketing 59 (July): 63–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • — and —. 1998. “Customer-Led and Market Oriented: Let’s Not Confuse the Two.”Strategic Management Journal 19 (October): 1001–1007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sutton, Robert I. and Andrew Hargadon. 1996. “Brainstorming Groups in Context: Effectiveness in a Product Design Firm.”Administrative Science Quarterly 41:685–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J. D. 1965Organizations in Action. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valacich, Joseph S., Alan R. Dennis, and Terry Connolly. 1994. “Idea Generation in Computer-Based Groups: A New Ending to an Old Story.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 57 (March): 448–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —, Bradley C. Wheeler, Brian E. Mennecke, and Rence Wachter. 1995. “The Effects of Numerical and Logical Group Size on Computer-Mediated Idea Generation.”Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 62 (June): 318–329.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Gundy, A. B. 1988.Techniques of Structures Problem Solving. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, Christian and Albert Hayashi 1994. “A New Way to Create Winning Product Ideas.”Journal of Product Innovation Management 11 (March): 146–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodman, Richard W., John E. Sawyer, and Ricky W. Griffin. 1993. “Toward a Theory of Organizational Creativity.”Academy of Management Review 18 (April): 293–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zaltman, Gerald, Robert Duncan, and Jonny Holbek. 1973.Innovations and Organizations. New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zirger, Billie Jo and Modesto A. Maidique. 1990. “A Model of New Product Development: An Empirical Test.”Management Science 36 (July): 67–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zmud, R. W. 1982. “Diffusion of Modern Software Practices: Influence of Centralization and Formalization.”Management Science 28 (December): 1421–131.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Utah State University, Utah, USA

    Lisa C. Troy

  2. Texas A&M University, Texas, USA

    David M. Szymanski & P. Rajan Varadarajan

Authors
  1. Lisa C. Troy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. David M. Szymanski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. Rajan Varadarajan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Lisa C. Troy is an assistant professor of marketing at Utah State University. She earned her Ph.D. from Texas A&M University. Her research interests include product innovation management, environmental marketing, and international marketing management. Her work has appeared in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science and theJournal of Marketing.

David M. Szymanski is the Al and Marion Withers Research Fellow and Director, Center for Retailing Studies in the Lowry Mays College and Graduate School of Business at Texas A&M University. His research interests are in the areas of applied meta-analysis, marketing strategy, personal selling and sales management, product innovation, and retail strategy. Representative research has appeared in theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of Marketing Research, theJournal of Personal Selling and Sales Management, and theJournal of Retailing.

P. Rajan Varadarajan is a professor of marketing and the Jenna and Calvin R. Guest professor of business administration at Texas A&M University. His research interests are in the areas of corporate, business, and marketing strategy. His research has been published in theJournal of Marketing, theJournal of the Academy of Marketing Science, theAcademy of Management Journal, theStrategic Management Journal, Sloan Management Review, California Management Review, Business Horizons, and other journals.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Troy, L.C., Szymanski, D.M. & Varadarajan, P.R. Generating new product ideas: An initial investigation of the role of market information and organizational characteristics. JAMS 29, 89–101 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070301291006

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0092070301291006

Keywords

Search

Navigation