The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Fuzzy Front End of New Product Development for Discontinuous Innovations: A Theoretical Model
Abstract
The fuzzy front end of the new product development (NPD) process, the time and activity prior to an organization's first screen of a new product idea, is the root of success for firms involved with discontinuous new product innovation. Yet understanding the fuzzy front‐end process has been a challenge for academics and organizations alike. While approaches to handling the fuzzy front end have been suggested in the literature, these tend to be relevant largely for incremental new product situations where organizations are aware of and are involved in the NPD process from the project's beginning. For incremental new products, structured problems or opportunities typically are laid out at the organizational level and are directed to individuals for information gathering. In the case of discontinuous innovations, however, we propose that the process works in the opposite direction—that is, that the timing and likelihood of organizational‐level involvement is more likely to be at the discretion of individuals. Such individuals perform a boundary‐spanning function by identifying and by understanding emerging patterns in the environment, with little or no direction from the organization. Often, these same individuals also act as gatekeepers by deciding on the value to the organization of externally derived information, as well as whether such information will be shared. Consequently for discontinuous innovations, information search and related problems/opportunities are unstructured and are at the individual level during the fuzzy front end. As such, the direction of initial decisions about new environmental information tends to be inward, toward the corporate decision‐making level, rather than the other way around. In order to cope with the special and complex nature of decisions made at the fuzzy front end of NPD for discontinuous innovations, this process is detailed as a series of decisions occurring over three proposed interfaces: boundary, gatekeeping, and project. The difference between each interface lies in the nature of the decisions made: At the boundary and gatekeeping interfaces, the primary impetus is individual‐level decision‐making; at the project interface, decisions occur at the organizational level. By articulating these processes in the form of a model, we achieve two objectives: (1) We outline a more detailed and comprehensive approach to understanding the nature of the front‐end decision making process for discontinuous innovations; and (2) we detail specific propositions for future research on each stage of the process.
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
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
Burt, R. S. (1992) · doi:10.4159/9780674029095 · Cited by 9,093
THE STRUCTURE OF SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTIONS
MCGUIRE, J. E. (1963) · Philosophical Books · doi:10.1111/j.1468-0149.1963.tb00813.x · Cited by 8,424
Burns, T., & Stalker, G. M. (1994) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198288787.001.0001 · Cited by 7,250
Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments
Tushman, M. L., & Anderson, P. (1986) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2392832 · Cited by 6,112
(1985) · American Economic Review · Cited by 6,056
Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility
Katz, M. L. (1985) · American Economic Review · Cited by 6,052
An organizational learning framework: From intuition to institution
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/259140 · Cited by 4,544
Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation
Dosi, G. (2000) · Innovation, Organization and Economic Dynamics · doi:10.4337/9781782541851.00008 · Cited by 4,272
Cited by
Organizational Culture and Innovation: A Meta‐Analytic Review
Büschgens, T., Bausch, A., & Balkin, D. B. (2013) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/jpim.12021 · Cited by 649
Studying the links between organizational culture, innovation, and performance in Spanish companies
Naranjo-Valencia, J. C., Jiménez-Jiménez, D., & Sanz-Valle, R. (2016) · Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología · doi:10.1016/j.rlp.2015.09.009 · Cited by 429
Wong, S. K. S. (2013) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.1746 · Cited by 356
Performance of Global New Product Development Programs: A Resource‐Based View
Kleinschmidt, E. J., De Brentani, U., & Salomo, S. (2007) · Journal of Product Innovation Management · doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2007.00261.x · Cited by 278
Self-citationVerworn, B., Herstatt, C., & Nagahira, A. (2008) · R&D Management · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9310.2007.00492.x · Cited by 253
Metadata
- Authors
- Reid, S. E., & De Brentani, U.
- Venue
- Journal of Product Innovation Management
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2004-04-22
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 170-184
- ISSN
- 0737-6782 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-5885
- OpenAlex
- W2125237007
- Cited by
- 707
- References
- 78
- FWCI
- 53.70
- 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: The Fuzzy Front End of New Product Development for Discontinuous Innovations: A Theoretical Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.0737-6782.2004.00068.x
- The paper
- Reid, S. E., & De Brentani, U. (2004). The Fuzzy Front End of New Product Development for Discontinuous Innovations: A Theoretical Model. Journal of Product Innovation Management. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0737-6782.2004.00068.x
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.