The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Resolving the Capability–Rigidity Paradox in New Product Innovation
Open accessAbstract
Managers face an important strategic dilemma in product innovation: how to exploit existing product innovation competencies (competence exploitation) while avoiding their dysfunctional rigidity effects by renewing and replacing them with entirely new competencies (competence exploration). Although the resolution of what is termed the “capability–rigidity paradox” is considered a fundamental managerial task in enhancing product innovation outcomes and the firm's competitive advantage, it has received little research attention. The author argues and finds support that market orientation provides a key to this paradox. Specifically, customer and competitor orientations ensure simultaneous investments in exploiting existing product innovation competencies and exploring new ones. The author also finds that the effects of these orientations on competence exploitation and exploration are differentially moderated by interfunctional coordination and perceived market opportunity. Regarding outcomes, competence exploitation and exploration have opposing relationships with incremental and radical innovation performance. However, the relationship between competence exploration and radical innovation performance is positively moderated by interfunctional coordination. Overall, the results of this study suggest that market orientation can prevent a firm from becoming operationally efficient but strategically inefficient by simultaneously engendering competence exploitation and exploration, which are differentially related to incremental and radical product innovation outcomes.
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
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173 · Cited by 91,532
Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage
Barney, J. (1991) · Journal of Management · doi:10.1177/014920639101700108 · Cited by 48,334
Exploration and Exploitation in Organizational Learning
March, J. G. (1991) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71 · Cited by 21,942
Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the replication of technology
Kogut, B., & Zander, U. (1992) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.3.3.383 · Cited by 12,939
Strategic assets and organizational rent
Amit, R., & Schoemaker, P. J. H. (1993) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250140105 · Cited by 8,425
Exploring internal stickiness: Impediments to the transfer of best practice within the firm
Szulanski, G. (1996) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250171105 · Cited by 7,839
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
Grant, R. M. (1996) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.7.4.375 · Cited by 5,649
Hurley, R. F., & Hult, G. T. M. (1998) · Journal of Marketing · doi:10.1177/002224299806200303 · Cited by 3,971
Atuahene-Gima, K., & Ko, A. (2001) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.12.1.54.10121 · Cited by 1,008
Self-citationCo-Evolution of Capabilities and Industry: The Evolution of Mutual Fund Processing
Levinthal, D., & Myatt, J. (1994) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.4250150905 · Cited by 343
Cited by
Organizational Ambidexterity: Balancing Exploitation and Exploration for Sustained Performance
Raisch, S., Birkinshaw, J., Probst, G., & Tushman, M. L. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1090.0428 · Cited by 2,224
Exploitation-Exploration Tensions and Organizational Ambidexterity: Managing Paradoxes of Innovation
Andriopoulos, C., & Lewis, M. W. (2009) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1080.0406 · Cited by 2,195
Cross-Sectional versus longitudinal survey research: concepts, findings, and guidelines
Rindfleisch, A., Malter, A. J., Ganesan, S., & Moorman, C. (2008) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.45.3.261 · Cited by 1,305
Schreyögg, G., & Kliesch‐Eberl, M. (2007) · Strategic Management Journal · doi:10.1002/smj.613 · Cited by 1,036
Resource-based theory in marketing
Kozlenkova, I. V., Samaha, S. A., & Palmatier, R. W. (2014) · Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science · doi:10.1007/s11747-013-0336-7 · Cited by 882
Metadata
- Authors
- Atuahene-Gima, K.
- Venue
- Journal of Marketing
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 69
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 61-83
- ISSN
- 0022-2429 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-7185
- OpenAlex
- W2172993583
- Cited by
- 1,510
- References
- 11
- FWCI
- 67.16
- 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
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.