The Adoption of Radical and Incremental Innovations: An Empirical Analysis

This paper proposes and empirically tests whether different models are needed to predict the adoption of technical process innovations that contain a high degree of new knowledge radical innovations and a low degree of new knowledge incremental innovations. Results from a sample of 40 footwear manufacturers suggest that extensive knowledge depth measured by the number of technical specialists is important for the adoption of both innovation types. Larger firms are likely to have both more technical specialists and to adopt radical innovations. The study did not find associations between the adoption of either innovation type and decentralized decision making, managerial attitudes toward change, and exposure to external information. By implication, managers trying to encourage technical process innovation adoption need not be as concerned about modifying centralization of decision making, managerial attitudes and exposure to external information as would managers trying to encourage other types of innovation adoption, e.g., innovations in social services where these factors have been found to be important. Instead, investment in human capital in the form of technical specialists appears to be a major facilitator of technical process innovation adoption.

[1]  Jean Carroll,et al.  A Note on Departmental Autonomy and Innovation in Medical Schools , 1967 .

[2]  K. Knight.  A Descriptive Model of the Intra-Firm Innovation Process , 1967 .

[3]  Craig C. Lundberg,et al.  Social change in complex organizations , 1970 .

[4]  R. Normann,et al.  Organizational Innovativeness: Product Variation and Reorientation , 1971 .

[5]  G. Zaltman,et al.  Innovations and organizations , 2020, Organizational Innovation.

[6]  R. Dewar,et al.  Elite Values Versus Organizational Structure in Predicting Innovation , 1973 .

[7]  A. Kaluzny,et al.  Innovation of health services: a comparative study of hospitals and health departments. , 1974, The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly. Health and society.

[8]  James M. Utterback,et al.  Innovation in Industry and the Diffusion of Technology , 1974, Science.

[9]  Henry L. Tosi.  Theories of Organization , 1975 .

[10]  J. Kimberly.  Organizational size and the structuralist perspective: a review, critique, and proposal , 1976 .

[11]  Lawrence B. Mohr,et al.  Conceptual issues in the study of innovation , 1976 .

[12]  Robert Dewar,et al.  Implications for Organizational Design of Structural Alterations as a consequence of Growth and Innovation , 1977 .

[13]  M. Moch,et al.  Size, Centralization and Organizational Adoption of Innovations , 1977 .

[14]  J. March.  Footnotes To Organizational Change , 1980 .

[15]  J. Kimberly,et al.  Organizational innovation: the influence of individual, organizational, and contextual factors on hospital adoption of technological and administrative innovations. , 1981, Academy of Management journal. Academy of Management.

[16]  William D. Perreault,et al.  A Conceptual Paradigm and Approach for the Study of Innovators , 1981 .

[17]  L. Phillips.  Assessing Measurement Error in Key Informant Reports: A Methodological Note on Organizational Analysis in Marketing , 1981 .

[18]  Donald C. Pelz,et al.  Originality level and the innovating process in organizations , 1982 .

[19]  P. H. Friesen,et al.  Innovation in Conservative and Entrepreneurial Firms: Two Models of Strategic Momentum , 1982 .

[20]  John E. Ettlie,et al.  Organizational Policy and Innovation Among Suppliers to the Food Processing Sector , 1983 .

[21]  J. Ettlie,et al.  Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical Versus Incremental Innovation , 1984 .

[22]  Fariborz Damanpour,et al.  The Adoption of Technological, Administrative, and Ancillary Innovations: Impact of Organizational Factors , 1987 .