Front-end of innovation: a systematic review and lifecycle analysis

Oliveira, Maicon Gouvêa de; Mendes, Glauco Henrique de Sousa; Serrano, Karina Mendes

doi:10.1108/ejim-01-2022-0047

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 112 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The theoretical background presented on FFE allowed a historical overview of this construct, the identification of how the key issues in FFE have evolved and also of the existing gaps in FFE. As indicated by various authors (Joachim & Spieth, 2020;Oliveira et al, 2022;Park et al, 2021), research on FFE has advanced but it is still not a consolidated topic in the literature. On the other hand, the theoretical referential on the degree of product innovation and its relationship with flexibility and iteration and the creative process, provide tools to analyze and understand the FFE from two dimensions: degree of innovation and time (project stage).…”

Section: Analysis Of Ffe Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…FFE became a topic of study over the last three decades with an increasing relevance, as demonstrated by the growing number of publications on the subject in the last 15 years (Borgianni et al, 2018;Costa & Toledo, D 2016;Joachim & Spieth, 2020;Oliveira et al, 2022;Park et al, 2021;Takey & Carvalho, 2016); thus, research on FFE shows significant advances. From the late 1980s to the early 2000s, FFE research focus was on process, under the context of incremental innovation (Cooper, 1988;Khurana & Rosenthal, 1997;Reinertsen & Smith, 1991).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From the late 1980s to the early 2000s, FFE research focus was on process, under the context of incremental innovation (Cooper, 1988;Khurana & Rosenthal, 1997;Reinertsen & Smith, 1991). According to Oliveira et al (2022), between 2000 and 2010, the FFE construct was consolidated, and its influence verified. Since 2010, research on FFE has matured by focusing on deepening some topics and extending the frontiers of FFE to different forms of innovation, such as services and business models.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Incremental Innovation versus Discontinuous Innovation: An Analysis of the Fuzzy Front End

Uribe Ocampo,

Kaminski

2023

Innovar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Companies innovate to increase revenues or reduce costs. The literature identifies two types of innovation approaches: incremental innovation, when an enterprise uses and “exploits” its current competencies, and radical innovation, which points out a company’s need to develop and “explore” new competencies. In product design and development through discontinuous innovation, fuzzy front end (ffe)— the most critical stage due to the difficulty of understanding and articulating the opportunities detected—has a decisive impact. Thus, through literature analysis, this reflective article allows a deeper understanding of ffe from two dimensions: i) Degree of innovation—incremental innovation vs. discontinuous innovation— and ii) Time—a project stage. To that end, we propose a framework of reference for ffe construct. The results enable academia to reduce the gap around the ffe construct and companies involved in innovation projects to better understand the nature of a project according to the degree of innovation of a new product, as well as how to proceed in order to reduce uncertainties; insights that could ultimately increase the chances of a new product becoming successful.

show abstract

Section: Analysis Of Ffe Modelsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Incremental Innovation versus Discontinuous Innovation: An Analysis of the Fuzzy Front End

Uribe Ocampo,

Kaminski

2023

Innovar

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Table 2. Research works on front end of innovation (FEI) analysis models (adapted from [47,[50][51][52]).…”

Section: Front End Of Innovation (Fei)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Including Sustainability Criteria in the Front End of Innovation in Technology Ventures

de Antonio Boada,

Durán,

Gómez Ávila

et al. 2023

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study evaluates the presence of sustainability parameters in the product development process, especially in the early stages of innovation, using the Sustainability Technology Readiness Level (STRL) tool. STRL assesses the initial planning of products or product and service systems (PSS) and suggests possibilities for incorporating sustainable features in the short, medium, and long term based on responses from startups (EBTs). The research was conducted in two ecosystems at different maturity levels: Florianópolis (Brazil), a more mature stage, and Santander (Colombia), which is growing, considering their cultural and social differences. To validate the STRL tool, four out of the eighteen winning startups from the MuEBTe SANTANDER public funding project in Colombia were selected. Characteristics of the two researched ecosystems, their actors, strengths, approaches, and expansion possibilities were identified and compared. The innovation lies in establishing a sustainable baseline when applying the tool by acquiring the front-end characteristic matrix. It was observed that sustainability as a variable has relevance and independence from product design in product planning, allowing for the selection of short, medium, and long-term actions throughout the product’s lifecycle. It was concluded that considering sustainability involves context and vision, resulting in significant choices of materials, processes, and production methods that add value and appreciation for the customer.

show abstract

“…The front-end stages of innovation play a crucial role as product concepts developed during this phase serve as a foundation for decision-making in subsequent development stages (de Oliveira et al ., 2022). Generating innovative product concepts requires diverse teams to work together and integrate their knowledge, ideas and perspectives (Aggarwal and Woolley, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Artefacts as boundary objects for concept development: a configurational approach

Zasa,

Buganza

2023

EJIM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis study aims to investigate how configurations of boundary objects (BOs) support innovation teams in developing innovative product concepts. Specifically, it explores the effectiveness of different artefact configurations in facilitating collaboration and bridging knowledge boundaries during the concept development process.Design/methodology/approachThe research is based on data from ten undergraduate innovation teams working with an industry partner in a creative industry. Six categories of BOs are identified, which serve as tools for collaboration. The study applies fsQCA (fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis) to analyse the configurations employed by the teams to bridge knowledge boundaries and support the development of innovative product concepts.FindingsThe findings of the study reveal two distinct groups of configurations: product envisioning and product design. The configurations within the “product envisioning” group support the activities of visioning and pivoting, enabling teams to innovate the product concept by altering the product vision. On the other hand, the configurations within the “product design” group facilitate experimenting, modelling and prototyping, allowing teams to design the attributes of the innovative product concept while maintaining the product vision.Originality/valueThis research contributes to the field of innovation by providing insights into the role of BOs and their configurations in supporting innovation teams during concept development. The results suggest that configurations of “product envisioning” support bridging semantic knowledge boundaries, while configurations within “product design” bridge pragmatic knowledge boundaries. This understanding contributes to the broader field of knowledge integration and innovation in design contexts.

show abstract

Front-end of innovation: a systematic review and lifecycle analysis

Cited by 6 publications

References 112 publications

Incremental Innovation versus Discontinuous Innovation: An Analysis of the Fuzzy Front End

Incremental Innovation versus Discontinuous Innovation: An Analysis of the Fuzzy Front End

Including Sustainability Criteria in the Front End of Innovation in Technology Ventures

Artefacts as boundary objects for concept development: a configurational approach

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About