The strategic management of re‐innovation

Abstract

Most studies of the management of the technological innovation process cover the range of activities that culminate in the commercial introduction of a new product. In certain sectors of industry, however, especially those characterised by extended product lifecycles, continued competitiveness depends on vigorous and continuous product improvement, i.e. on the process of ‘re‐innovation’ to satisfy evolving user requirements. Ongoing research at SPRU has investigated the process of re‐innovation in a number of industry sectors, and the paper presents material relating to two of the characteristic patterns of re‐innovation identified in this research. The first characteristic pattern is re‐innovation combining the existing with the new. Two brief case studies are presented. In both cases, the manufacturer and customer gained significant benefits from this re‐innovation strategy. For the manufacturer there were reduced development and testing costs, scale and learning curve benefits, distributed inventories of spares and servicing experience. For the customer there were familiarity benefits and reduced entry risks associated with proven reliability of parts and sub‐systems. The second, and more general pattern of re‐innovation is based on the concept of the ‘robust design’. This is a basic design which has sufficient inherent technological slack or flexibility to enable it to evolve into a significant design family of variants. Product design families offer the producer economies of scale in R&D, manufacturing, marketing and sales and servicing. They offer the user learning from experience, the enhanced possibility of user‐inspired modifications, a wider range of price/ performance packages and rapid adaptations to changing environments. Robust designs can effectively combine economies of scale with economies of scope; they are strategically more flexible than leanly configured designs which satisfy only transient user requirements.

The Temporal Dimension of R&D Evaluation: Incorporating Spin-Off Benefits

“…This capacity has been called "robustness" by Rothwell and Gardiner (1989). A robust technology has sufficient flexibility to enable it to evolve into a significant constellation or family of variants, while a less robust technology is not easily adapted to new configurations and is more easily bypassed by alternative technologies when user specifications change.…”

User-Driven Innovation Concepts and the Cruise Industry

“…The fear of scaring away existing customers is often linked to a very radical understanding of innovation. Such radical or big-change innovations, which lead to entirely new products, are fairly rare and make up only about 10 % of all innovations (Rothwell and Gardner 1989). They are usually quite a challenge for existing userproducer relationships (Lundvall 1992).…”

L'effort de recherche de la PME industrielle face au développement de produits nouveaux : la prépondérance des moyens humains

“…À l 'extrêm e, on va ju sq u 'à parler de m anagem ent de la qualité, du design et plus globalem ent de « ré-in n o v atio n » (Bigoness et Perreault, 1981). Cette stratégie de «ré-innovation» permet, selon Rothwell et Gardiner (1989) D ans le cadre de cette étude, nous parlerons d 'activité innovatrice en produit dès lors q u 'un produit est considéré comme nouveau par l 'entreprise qui le développe, même s 'il ne s'agit que de modifications apportées à un produit déjà existant (Choffray et Lilien, 1984). Dans la perspective d 'une définition de l'innovation, en particulier pour l 'activité innovatrice en produit, proche de celle que nous venons de présenter, un certain nom bre de travaux récents tiennent com pte des diverses dim ensions de l 'effort de recherche (m arketing, R et D, production... ) et de son contexte (structures et stratégies de l 'entreprise) dans l 'approche intégrée des déterm inants du com portem ent innovatif.…”