Exploring the Innovation Phase of Radically-New High-Tech Products: An Investigation of Two Historical Cases of AIDC Technologies

The transformation of a new technological principle into a marketable product usually signifies a long and risky route for organizations engaged in the commercialization of radically new high-tech products. New products often fail to make it to the market, are delayed for their market introduction, or are withdrawn shortly after their market introduction. The period that spans from invention to (first) market introduction of radically new high-tech products (i.e. the innovation phase) has been found to last on average ten years (Ortt, 2010). Furthermore, the duration of the innovation phase may significantly vary per product. Arguably, this duration is suspected to encompass several barriers and strategic interaction. This thesis explores the erratic nature of the innovation phase by asking “what are the key actors and factors that facilitate or hamper innovation?”, “how are these interrelated?”, and “what strategies can be derived for organizations?”. The issue of successfully developing and commercializing innovative products pertains to a vast literature and several theoretical domains that have different units of analysis and orientation towards the innovation process. Although, theories propose different actors and factors as barriers and/or facilitators to bringing new technological products to the market, a comprehensive picture of how these actors and factors interact and influence the course of the innovation phase is lacking. This thesis argues that a more complete picture of the innovation phase can be achieved by synthesizing a wide range of notions from different theories. In turn, this can assist the process of devising more holistic innovation strategies. For the purpose of this research, a two-phase methodological approach has been followed. The first phase consists of a literature review that selectively examines the fields of: Strategic Niche Management, Organizational Capabilities/Characteristics and Innovation, the Valley of Death in Innovation, and the Fuzzy Front End of Innovation. The project theorizes that the concepts presented by these theories can be better understood if categorized along three broad and separate but interrelated levels: (i) a macro-level that comprises the market environment within which transitions to new technological regimes take place; (ii) a meso-level that is composed by the organization that considers the commercialization of radically new technologies; and (iii) a micro-level that consists of the project within which a new product is developed. The examined theories emphasize interrelations among factors that are usually found at the same level of analysis. However, this study attempts to reveal interaction among factors both within and across these levels. The integration of actors, factors, and interrelations is realized through the construction of a multi-level framework based on the distinction of the three aforementioned levels of interaction. The framework serves both as a static list of key influencing actors and factors, and for addressing interrelations among them. It is presumed that the same actors and factors can act as barriers and/or facilitators to innovation. Several simple mechanisms of interaction between factors are proposed, such as barriers reinforcing other barriers, or facilitators diminishing barriers. These mechanisms concern interaction among factors, both within and across levels. Consequently, more advanced mechanisms are derived, such as a chain of reinforcing barriers might create a negative feedback loop that possibly blocks radical innovation. A web consisting of barriers and facilitators that may have multiple causes and effects at the same time is revealed. With regard to the interaction among actors, a systematic way of interrelating is more difficult because of their complex nature. The framework is illustrated and refined in a second phase, with the investigation of two historical cases of Automatic Identification and Data Capturing (AIDC) technologies: Radio Frequency Identification and barcode. The analysis, which is based on secondary published documentation, enables not only the identification of several actors and factors, but also demonstration of interactions among factors and factors both within and across the distinguished levels. In addition, generic strategies for companies to cope with the innovation phase are derived as a result of empirical observations within the case studies. The major outcome of the project is the multi-level framework to address key actors and factors, and interrelationships that influence the innovation phase. Macro-level factors include: Technological Factors, Economic Factors, Competition, Supply Networks, Infrastructure & Maintenance Networks, Social Networks, Psychological & Cultural Factors, Social & Environmental Effects, Government Policy, Legislation & Regulation (Laws, Standards and Rules), Institutional Risk, and Competition; Meso-level factors include: Scientific Knowledge and Firm-Specific Techniques, Technical Systems, Managerial Systems, Organizational Culture and Values, and Financial Resources; and Micro-level factors include: Opportunity, Product Concept & Definition, Project Planning, and New Product Development process. With regard to the actors, Macro-level actors include: Governments, Research Institutes, Universities, Industries, Policy-makers, Regulators, Suppliers, Providers of Complementary Products, Potential Users (Early Adopters), Scientists, and Autonomous Entrepreneurs; Meso-level actors include: (Network of) Companies-Developers, Top - management, Executives, and Consultants; and Micro-level actors include: Product Champions, Project Managers, and Project Teams. Moreover, the emergence and influence of actors and factors within the case studies, indicated the following four key generic strategies for companies to deal with to the innovation phase: (i) Collaboration with other Knowledge Producing Institutions, (ii) Strategic Patent Acquisition, (iii) Working together with Potential Early Adopters, and (iv) Long-term Investment in Technology. These should not be viewed as competing alternatives, but, rather as mutually supporting options for firms that are engaged with development and/or commercialization efforts. The overall findings suggest a rather complex landscape for organizations seeking the commercialization of radical high-tech products. The innovation phase is characterized by significant dynamics in terms of the actors involved with research and/or NPD projects. Moreover, the successful market introduction of new technologies is more likely to be determined by a dynamic combination of factors functioning at different levels. Companies might take advantage of developments at all levels and successfully market a new product, without necessarily being active in investments for a long period of time. However, the context matters. The context might refer to the type of application (i.e. more systemic or less systemic), or the degree of complexity of the technology (i.e. relatively simple or complex systems). Finally, caution is required as there is no panacea for the challenges faced by actors during the innovation phase. Solutions must be tailored to the specific context with which development and commercialization efforts are confronted.Technology, Policy and ManagementValues, Technology and Innovation / Economics of Technology and InnovationsManagement of Technolog