CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3,470Innovation and Knowledge ManagementInnovation Diffusion and ForecastingProduct Development and Customization

A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review

Garcia, Rosanna, Calantone, Roger·2002·Journal of Product Innovation Management
DOI 10.1111/1540-5885.1920110
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A plethora of definitions for innovation types has resulted in an ambiguity in the way the terms ‘innovation’ and ‘innovativeness’ are operationalized and utilized in the new product development literature. The terms radical, really‐new, incremental and discontinuous are used ubiquitously to identify innovations. One must question, what is the difference between these different classifications? To date consistent definitions for these innovation types have not emerged from the new product research community. A review of the literature from the marketing, engineering, and new product development disciplines attempts to put some clarity and continuity to the use of these terms. This review shows that it is important to consider both a marketing and technological perspective as well as a macrolevel and microlevel perspective when identifying innovations. Additionally, it is shown when strict classifications from the extant literature are applied, a significant shortfall appears in empirical work directed toward radical and really new innovations. A method for classifying innovations is suggested so that practitioners and academics can talk with a common understanding of how a specific innovation type is identified and how the innovation process may be unique for that particular innovation type. A recommended list of measures based on extant literature is provided for future empirical research concerning technological innovations and innovativeness. “A rose is a rose is a rose. And a rose by any other name would smell just as sweet.” Gertrude Stein & William Shakespeare

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/1540-5885.1920110

Cites

73 of 73 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Garcia, R., & Calantone, R.
Affiliations
Michigan State University (US)
Corresponding author
Garcia, Rosanna
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Product Innovation Management
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-03
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
110-132
ISSN
  • 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5885
DOI
10.1111/1540-5885.1920110
OpenAlex
W2109783817
Cited by
3,470
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 71 · 2025: 89 · 2024: 107 · 2023: 135 · 2022: 160 · 2021: 192 · 2020: 210 · 2019: 198 · 2018: 230 · 2017: 201 · 2016: 204 · 2015: 230 · 2014: 231 · 2013: 236 · 2012: 181
FWCI
143.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 574 d)
Locations
Journal of Product Innovation Management (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Innovation and Knowledge Management
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Innovation Diffusion and Forecasting
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Product Development and Customization
Keywords
innovation types, innovativeness, new product development, radical innovation, incremental innovation, discontinuous innovation, innovation classification, innovation measurement

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