Search

Previous research has considered how exploratory market learning processes moderate market and technological uncertainty in radical product development. Scholars argue that new product development (NPD) teams may increase the chances of success of radically new projects by acquiring, assimilating and implementing new information from market feedback. However, research has not tackled how information is assimilated by the NPD team and to what extent the process of information implementation occurs. In this article, we begin to fill the need for such research by investigating the interaction between internal team values (beliefs and possibly ideology) and external market feedback / information in radical projects. Via the lens of a 2-year longitudinal participant-observation study, we suggest that information assimilation is not automatic, but rather influenced in interesting ways by internal team values. The findings imply that shared team values act as a selective assimilation mechanism determining whether a development team will act on user feedback. Furthermore, the type of information (e.g., functional vs. conceptual feedback) processed by the development team acts as a moderating factor on the relationship between the team values and information processing.

Previous research has considered extensively the causes and effects of market entry order and timing. It has neglected, however, the timeliness of such entry — the degree to which a firm delivered a new product on the date it had set for its release. In this article, we begin to fill the need for such research by evaluating some strategic explanations for why a firm might miss a scheduled entry date. We then test whether such “tardy entry” influences sales performance in the new market.

Environmental issues, while of growing interest, have been outside the main focus of business scholarship. This position on the periphery may have been a good thing. It allowed scholars of business and the environment to consider unusual theories and evaluate overlooked phenomenon. In doing so, they created a body of research that provides new insights on two topics of mainstream interest -- the sources of competitive advantage and the origin and function of self-regulatory institutions.