Abstract
Over the past three decades, a rapidly expanding academic literature has investigated how new markets are created and how existing markets are transformed, phenomena this article refers to as “market innovation”. The literature on market innovation is currently fragmented and characterized by heterogeneity of terminology, theoretical paradigms, and empirical research settings. The purpose of this article is to map the field, identify distinct research clusters, and uncover shifts in the literature’s underpinning conceptual perspectives. Specifically, using bibliometric mapping, the article identifies six clusters of market innovation research. Further analysis reveals three major shifts in the literature over time: (1) a shift from reductionism to emergence, (2) a shift from central agency to distributed agency, and (3) a shift from linearity to non-linearity. To advance the understanding of all three shifts and move theory development forward, complexity theory offers a valuable meta-theoretical framework. Future research directions are derived from complexity theory.
Highlights
Markets are fundamental to managerial thought and practice because they present the domain of action for firms
We suggest that complexity theory (Boisot & McKelvey 2010; Maguire et al 2006) presents a potential meta-theoretical framework that offers concepts and tools that can improve the explanatory power of market innovation research
We reviewed the market innovation literature, iden tified six research clusters, discussed their interrelations, identified major shifts in the literature, and proposed new directions for future research
Summary
Markets are fundamental to managerial thought and practice because they present the domain of action for firms. LEV manufacturers had to make major technology design de cisions (e.g., purely electric vehicles versus hybrid cars combining an electric motor with an internal combustion engine); challenge players in the automotive industry with a vested interest in the technological status quo; establish new preferences among consumers; navigate complex networks of stakeholders, including car dealers, health and safety au thorities, lawmakers, and governments; promote the creation of an adequate charging infrastructure; and achieve market legitimacy by addressing concerns regarding infrastructure requirements and net ef fects on the environment (Pinkse, Bohnsack & Kolk, 2014). Studies on market innovation draw on a broad set of theories, such as actor-network theory (Giesler, 2012), institutional theory (Humphreys, 2010), practice theory (Kjellberg & Helgesson, 2006) and the resource-based view (Pitelis & Teece, 2010). Research on market innovation is set in different empirical contexts, such as radical and breakthrough innovation (Aarikka-Stenroos & Lehtimaki, 2014; O’Connor & Rice, 2013), entrepreneurship (Read et al, 2009), bottom-of-the-pyramid markets (Ansari, Munir, & Gregg, 2012; Seelos & Mair, 2007), consumer activism (Weber, Heinze, & DeSoucey, 2008), and innovation policy (Mazzucato, 2016)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
