The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation
Open accessAbstract
Abstract This paper highlights distinctive features of a neglected class of economic activity in the domain of innovation, namely the creation and development of high cost, complex products and systems (CoPS), asking how their nature might be expected to affect innovation and industrial organisation. It argues that because CoPS are highly customised, engineering-intensive goods which often require several producers to work together simultaneously, the dynamics of innovation in CoPS are likely to differ from mass produced commodity goods. To consider the argument, the paper describes some of the defining features of CoPS and counterpoises two ideal-type innovation schemes: a `conventional' mass production innovation scheme, and an idealisation more suited to CoPS. Implications for innovation and industrial coordination are discussed, pointing to the project and the project-based organisation as natural CoPS organisational forms. While major differences between groups of CoPS are apparent, user involvement in innovation tends to be high and suppliers, regulators and professional bodies tend to work together with users ex-ante to negotiate new product designs, methods of production and post-delivery innovations. Markets are often bureaucratically administered and contestability is low in contrast to commodity goods which are characterised by arms-length market transactions. In relating the critical attributes of CoPS to industrial processes and organisational form, the paper emphasises the wide variety of possible innovation paths and points to the CoPS project, rather than the single firm, as a chief unit of analysis for innovation, management and competition analysis.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Coase, R. H. (1937) · Economica · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0335.1937.tb00002.x · Cited by 23,972
Competitive Strategy: Techniques for Analyzing Industries and Competitors
(1980) · Journal of Sustainable Competitive Intelligence · doi:10.24883/iberoamericanic.v2i2.38 · Cited by 16,592
Richardson, G. B. (1972) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2230256 · Cited by 2,200
Cited by
Gann, D. M., & Salter, A. J. (2000) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/s0048-7333(00)00114-1 · Cited by 1,315
Upgrading in Global Value Chains: Lessons from Latin American Clusters
Giuliani, E., Pietrobelli, C., & Rabellotti, R. (2005) · World Development · doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2005.01.002 · Cited by 1,073
Cool Projects, Boring Institutions: Temporary Collaboration in Social Context
Grabher, G. (2002) · Regional Studies · doi:10.1080/00343400220122025 · Cited by 854
Eckstein, D., Goellner, M., Blome, C., & Henke, M. (2015) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.970707 · Cited by 581
Di Stefano, G., Gambardella, A., & Verona, G. (2012) · Research Policy · doi:10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.021 · Cited by 494
Metadata
- Authors
- Hobday, M.
- Venue
- Research Policy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1998-02
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 689-710
- ISSN
- 0048-7333 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2040863051
- Cited by
- 1,041
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 36.84
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0048-7333(97)00044-9
- The paper
- Hobday, M. (1998). Product complexity, innovation and industrial organisation. Research Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(97)00044-9
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.