Rejecting Superior New Technologies

Woodside, Arch G.

doi:10.1007/978-1-349-14089-3_7

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in the rejection stage, advocates of the installed-base technology may seek the help of third-party inspectors and trade association leaders to prevent the testing of a really new product based on a revolutionary new technology; overcoming such a powerful combination of advocates for the existing installed-base technology usually requires consorted efforts by the advocates of the superior new technology (Woodside, 1996). Note in Figure 1 that some degree or form of rejection of a radically new productprocess is proposed before adoption occurs.…”

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Powerful forces rise up to prevent, delay, and subvert the testing and acceptance of a really new product developed using a superior new technology. To overcome such formidable obstacles often requires dramatic "organizational improvisation" (Gemü nden et al, 1992) and participation by a combination of on-site senior executives, performance testing the new technology (Woodside, 1996).…”

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Opposed to these champions of the new product, rejecters are persons championing the status quo; they stress financial, performance, and personal risks of adopting the new product and often are responsible for lengthy delays and outright rejection of the new product in many customer firms -particularly the large users of products manufactured using the older and still dominating technology (Woodside, 1996).…”

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Network champions (Woodside, 1996) serve as communication and support functions across organizations and IMDAR stages. While network champions can emerge from more than one organization, they often include a supply chain executive or an industrial manufacturer agent who stimulates unique multi-organizational meetings and special financing to demonstrate the superior performance of the new product to customers in local markets.…”

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reasons for such events include the need to transform (e.g. train and hire) new members of the sales force for marketing the NMT and to tackle any deepseated resentment and fear with respect to the NMT among experts of the installed-base technology (Woodside, 1996). For example, purchasing managers and specifying engineers may attempt to thwart reaching agreement to field test a new high-tech product because of the additional work involved in such testing and their contentment with the status quo.…”

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Modeling innovation, manufacturing, diffusion and adoption/rejection processes

Woodside

Biemans²

2005

Journal of Business &Amp; Industrial Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose -Seeks to advocate adopting the comparative case study method and system dynamics modeling to inform theory and to prescribe executive actions for successfully managing new products built using radically new technologies. Design/methodology/approach -Reviews NPD theory and research on the dynamic processes including feedback loops and the hidden demons (hard to identify weak linkages that have large downstream impacts) in radically new innovation, manufacturing, diffusion and adoption/rejection processes; examines the IMDAR process model (innovation-manufacturing-diffusion-adoption/rejection) of new products. Findings -Several alternative routes of tacit and explicit interorganizational behaviors and decisions lead to NPD successes and failures; while executives believe surveys identifying specific factors are important particularly for NPD success, none of these factors is necessary or sufficient by itself for explaining success -specific cases of NPD success occur in the absence of any one of the identified success factors -embracing a system dynamics rather than a main effects view of NPD success and failure provides solid grounding for useful theory and practice in NPD.Research limitations/implications -Does not provide an empirical comparison between cross-sectional data-based modelling versus system dynamics analysis. Business and industrial marketing research that embraces complexity and examines decision and actions over multiple time periods is still in its infancy. Practical implications -Most successful companies suffer from their success: they fail to remain watchful, mindful, and active with regard to new technological developments that seemingly have minor relationships to their industries. Originality/value -This paper offers a theory-of-the-firm system dynamics approach to inform new product executives to think beyond check-lists and embrace multiple-path thinking.

show abstract

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A General Imdar Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Modeling innovation, manufacturing, diffusion and adoption/rejection processes

Woodside

Biemans²

2005

Journal of Business &Amp; Industrial Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Advancing systems thinking and building microworlds in business and industrial marketing

Woodside

2006

Journal of Business &Amp; Industrial Marketing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThis article sets out to describe the benefits of systems thinking in overcoming short‐sighted decision making in business and industrial marketing.Design/methodology/approachThe article illustrates specific tools and recent applications of systems thinking research.FindingsThe basic building‐blocks for creating microworlds are the claims made by stakeholders running and affected by real‐life systems.Research limitations/implicationsSuggestions for future research includes transforming research designs from linear one‐way models to models expressly recognizing time delays, feedback loops among variables, and seemingly hidden, unimportant relationships.Practical implicationsAll business exchanges involve systems and there is more complexity than is readily apparent; systems thinking helps decision makers to deeply understand what is really happening.Originality/valueThis article advises replacing the one‐direction thinking and research paradigm that dominates business and industrial marketing with systems thinking and system dynamics modeling; the article identifies examples and the literature necessary to embrace this alternative paradigm.

show abstract

Rejecting Superior New Technologies

Cited by 2 publications

References 27 publications

Modeling innovation, manufacturing, diffusion and adoption/rejection processes

Modeling innovation, manufacturing, diffusion and adoption/rejection processes

Advancing systems thinking and building microworlds in business and industrial marketing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About