The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Inhibitors of disruptive innovation capability: a conceptual model
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to examine why large firms often fail to develop disruptive innovations. This study identifies several key inhibitors or barriers that hinder those developments. A conceptual model is presented that examines the interrelationship and interdependence of these inhibiting factors, in an effort to provide a better understanding of how companies can improve their disruptive innovation capabilities. Design/methodology/approach: This paper focuses on disruptive innovation rather than incremental innovation and is limited to research findings on large corporations. Recently published works (1990‐2004) have examined success factors as the determinants of disruptive innovation capability. A complementary approach is to examine the inhibitors of disruptive innovation and investigate their interrelationship and interdependence. The study is based on an extensive review of literature available, and examines both internal and external inhibiting factors to develop a conceptual model of disruptive innovation capabilities. Findings: Many large corporations fail to develop disruptive innovations. It is argued that the basic constraints to creating successful disruptive innovation stem in large part from several inhibiting factors, and we have identified different clusters of interrelated and partly‐interdependent inhibitors: the inability to unlearn obsolete mental models, a successful dominant design or business concept, a risk‐averse corporate climate, innovation process mismanagement, lack of adequate follow‐through competencies and the inability to develop mandatory internal or external infrastructure. The conceptual disruptive innovation capability model provides a better understanding of the interrelationship among these limiting factors. There is still a vast gap between intention and actual disruptive innovation capability. Developing distinctive capabilities to bridge this gap should be an integral part of a company's strategy for growth. Research limitations/implications: This paper is based on an extensive review of literature on disruptive innovation barriers. In it is proposed a conceptual interrelationship model of innovation inhibitors as a basis for determining and improving a company's disruptive innovation capability. It is suggested that, in addition to the theory presented in this paper, further empirical research studies be carried out to validate the key inhibitors of our conceptual model, their interrelationship and interdependence, and the impact on disruptive innovation development. Originality/value: The study is intended to provide practical insight into clusters of inhibiting factors that prevent large organisations from improving their disruptive innovation capability. The conceptual model facilitates the development of distinctive competencies and mindsets to improve these capabilities.
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
Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation
Cohen, W. M., & Levinthal, D. A. (1990) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393553 · Cited by 35,728
Levinthal, D. A., & March, J. G. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250141009 · Cited by 7,283
Core capabilities and core rigidities: A paradox in managing new product development
Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250131009 · Cited by 6,477
Market Orientation and the Learning Organization
Slater, S. F., & Narver, J. C. (1995) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299505900306 · Cited by 4,366
Managing Innovation: Integrating Technological, Market and Organizational Change
Tidd, J., Bessant, J., & Pavitt, K. (1997) · University of Maribor digital library (University of Maribor) · Cited by 4,199
Product development: Past research, present findings and future directions
Brown, S. L., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (1995) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258850 · Cited by 3,777
Christensen, C. M. (2011) · Vahlen eBooks · doi:10.15358/9783800642816 · Cited by 2,893
Ahuja, G., & Morris Lampert, C. (2001) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.176 · Cited by 2,501
Strategic Orientation of the Firm and New Product Performance
Gatignon, H., & Xuereb, J.-M. (1997) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1177/002224379703400107 · Cited by 2,264
The fifth discipline fieldbook: Strategies and tools for building a learning organization
(1995) · Long Range Planning · doi:10.1016/0024-6301(95)90931-1 · Cited by 2,109
Cited by
Towards innovation measurement in the software industry
Edison, H., bin Ali, N., & Torkar, R. (2013) · Journal of Systems and Software · doi:10.1016/j.jss.2013.01.013 · Cited by 269
A literature review of disruptive innovation: What it is, how it works and where it goes
Si, S., & Chen, H. (2020) · Journal of Engineering and Technology Management · doi:10.1016/j.jengtecman.2020.101568 · Cited by 226
Psychological factors influencing technology adoption: A case study from the oil and gas industry
Roberts, R., Flin, R., Millar, D., & Corradi, L. (2021) · Technovation · doi:10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102219 · Cited by 121
Contextual factors of disruptive innovation: A systematic review and framework
Antonio, J. L., & Kanbach, D. K. (2023) · Technological Forecasting and Social Change · doi:10.1016/j.techfore.2022.122274 · Cited by 74
Huang, H., Lai, M., Kao, M., & Chen, Y. (2012) · Canadian Journal of Administrative Sciences / Revue Canadienne des Sciences de l Administration · doi:10.1002/cjas.1229 · Cited by 48
Metadata
- Authors
- Assink, M.
- Venue
- European Journal of Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Emerald
- Published
- 2006-04-01
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 215-233
- ISSN
- 1460-1060 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2082999472
- Cited by
- 566
- References
- 51
- FWCI
- 35.70
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Inhibitors of disruptive innovation capability: a conceptual model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1108/14601060610663587
- The paper
- Assink, M. (2006). Inhibitors of disruptive innovation capability: a conceptual model. European Journal of Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/14601060610663587
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.