[go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v12y2003i2p235-270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Search strategy in product innovation process: theory and evidence from the evolution of agrochemical lead discovery process

Author

Listed:
  • Surya Mahdi
Abstract
This paper investigates different problem-solving strategies--herein called 'search strategies'--in the process of product innovation. It takes issue with the basic assumption of current models of the product innovation process (PIP), which unrealistically consider that the actors of product innovation--the product innovators--are all hyper-rational, homogeneous and non-choice-restricted actors. In order to take into account the more realistic view of the product innovators--as bounded rational, heterogeneous and choice-restricted actors--this paper proposes an alternative model of PIP based on cognitive psychology. According to this framework, the options of search strategy available to each product innovator depend on certain 'problem-solving-related' capabilities that he or she is able or not to use. To examine the validity of this theoretical framework, this paper investigates the phenomenon of the evolution of discovery methods in the agrochemical lead discovery process. Data for this investigation have been gathered through chronological product innovation survey of an agrochemical product registration database as well as a patent and publications index database. Results from this investigation seem to confirm the above argument. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Surya Mahdi, 2003. "Search strategy in product innovation process: theory and evidence from the evolution of agrochemical lead discovery process," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 12(2), pages 235-270, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:12:y:2003:i:2:p:235-270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Axel Stein, 2014. "The Significance of Distance in Innovation Biographies—The Case of Law Firms," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 45(3), pages 430-449, September.
    2. Sheth, Ananya & Sinfield, Joseph V., 2022. "An analytical framework to compare innovation strategies and identify simple rules," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Chataway, Joanna & Tait, Joyce & Wield, David, 2004. "Understanding company R&D strategies in agro-biotechnology: trajectories and blind spots," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 1041-1057, September.
    4. Appio, Francesco Paolo & Baglieri, Daniela & Cesaroni, Fabrizio & Spicuzza, Lucia & Donato, Alessia, 2022. "Patent design strategies: Empirical evidence from European patents," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 181(C).
    5. Xie, Zongjie & Hall, Jeremy & McCarthy, Ian P. & Skitmore, Martin & Shen, Liyin, 2016. "Standardization efforts: The relationship between knowledge dimensions, search processes and innovation outcomes," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 48, pages 69-78.
    6. Keld Laursen & Ammon Salter, 2003. "Searching Low and High What Types of Firms use Universities as a Source of Innovation?," DRUID Working Papers 03-16, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    7. Laursen, Keld & Salter, Ammon, 2004. "Searching high and low: what types of firms use universities as a source of innovation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(8), pages 1201-1215, October.
    8. Nightingale, Paul, 2004. "Technological capabilities, invisible infrastructure and the un-social construction of predictability: the overlooked fixed costs of useful research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(9), pages 1259-1284, November.
    9. Kopecka, Jarmila A. & Santema, Sicco C. & Buijs, Jan A., 2012. "Designerly ways of muddling through," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 65(6), pages 729-739.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:12:y:2003:i:2:p:235-270. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.