400

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

A Multidimensional Product-Concept Model Enhancing Cross-Functional Knowledge Creation in the Product Innovation Process: The Case of the Suunto t6 Training Wrist Computer
Seppo Hnninen and Ilkka Kauranen
This article presents a four-dimensional product-concept model enhancing cross-functional knowledge creation in product innovation: the dimensions presented in the new model are: technology, end-user, brand and business logic. The application of the model is described in the case study of the Suunto t6 training wrist computer. For the Suunto t6 development it was revealed that cross-functional knowledge creation had happened on an even larger scale than expected. Analysis of the results suggests that certain dimensions of the product concept can be especially indicative of cross-functional knowledge creation, such as concern with the endusers experience. Furthermore, the new product concept may provide an early warning of innovation-based diversication. Nicknames for the product concept under development, which requires the verbalisation of tacit subjective associations, can be used as indicators of cross-functional integration within the organization and as suitable indicators of tacit knowledge. Measurement of all relevant organizational capabilities is discussed.

Introduction
Product development is knowledge creation in which tacit images are translated into sharable concepts (cf. Madhavan & Grover, 1998; Nonaka, Toyama & Nagata, 2000). The underlying mental models may differ, however, and cause difculties in cross-functional knowledge creation (cf. Cohen & Levinthal, 1990). In particular, non-articulated images and mental models are liable of causing misunderstandings. Generaly, product concepts have emphasized only one or a few knowledge bases. For example, implementing product development from a technical solution to commercialization leads to low-level cross-functional knowledge creation, since in building the product concept in such a way the development stages follow each other consecutively instead of interacting concurrently. The product concept is the rst explicit phase in product-innovation related knowledge creation (Nonaka, Toyama & Nagata, 2000). Thus, the product concept

demands the conceptualization of tacit knowledge in a well-rounded way, taking, as exhaustively as possible, all the relevant knowledge bases into consideration. In contrast to this, patents, which are typically perceived to be a comprehensive means of conveying the essence of a new product concept, in fact describe only the technical solution. The co-presence of both individual and organizational creativity mechanisms will lead to the highest level of innovation performance (Bharadwaj & Menon, 2000). Well-functioning, multidimensional product-concept models support such creativity, and can be used as a medium for practical cross-functional knowledge creation. For the purposes of the present study, a definition for product concept can be derived by taking the essence of the denitions of concept and product denition as presented in the Product Development and Management Association (PDMA) Glossary for New Product Development. There, the [product] concept is dened as a clearly written and possibly
2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Volume 15

doi:10.1111/j.1467-8691.2006.00409.x

Number 4

2006

A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PRODUCT-CONCEPT MODEL

401

visual description of the new product idea that includes its primary features and consumer benets, combined with a broad understanding of the technology needed, and the product denition denes the product, including the target market, product concept, benets to be delivered, positioning strategy, price point, and even product requirements and design specications (PDMA, 2005). In the product innovation literature, one knowledge base is typically discussed at a time (Kogut & Zander, 1992; Tushman & Anderson, 1986; Walsh, 1995); very rarely are more than two knowledge bases discussed together (cf. Leonard-Barton, 1992). Gomes et al. (2001) recommend using various knowledge tools to support product innovation development. The various stakeholders have the best knowledge of their own knowledge bases, but the more they also know of other knowledge bases, the more cross-functional knowledge creation is enhanced. Without a shared product concept, arguing about the pros and cons can continue interminably, leading to battles between departments and individuals within the product innovation development organization. The need to enhance cross-functional knowledge creation in product innovation development is clear, and this is even more the case with modern knowledge-based products. The objective of the present study is to present and analyse a novel multidimensional product-concept model enhancing crossfunctional knowledge creation in product innovation development.

Cross-functional knowledge creation can be cumbersome and ineffective if the product concept utilizes the technological knowledge base alone, since in such a case the other phases, such as developing end-user solutions and developing business-logic solutions, follow linearly and not simultaneously.

Product Concepts Built on the Technology Knowledge Base and the Market Knowledge Base
The product innovation process, including the development of product concepts, is in the literature traditionally understood as either a technology-driven process or a market-driven process (Orihata & Watanabe, 2000). These two approaches seem to have developed initially as parallel lines of thinking. However, if market information can be integrated with the technological possibilities, more powerful product concepts can be built. The recommended approach for creating a product concept based jointly on the technology knowledge base and the market knowledge base is to agree initially on unied objectives. The option to be avoided is a continuous battle between the two functions for dominant position in the product-concept definition process. Solutions that concurrently utilize the technology knowledge base plus the market knowledge base solution in product development are typical in consumer product companies. One tool for furthering this outcome is that market information is collated with technological possibilities by regular candid and open meetings between the marketing function and the product development function within the company. In such a case, the probable outcome is that the product development is enhanced but also concentrated inside the company. In reality, such technology-market polarisation is an oversimplied view. For example, the brand is also another strong stakeholder in the product concept. Second, a viable product concept should acknowledge that competitors are only one group of market intermediaries, and competition is only one of the market processes (Porter, 1980).

Existing Knowledge and New Theory Development

Product Concepts Built on a Single Knowledge Base
In the emergence phase of innovation literature, product innovation was typically addressed with a sole emphasis or an overemphasis on the technological knowledge base. Extending the focus of attention to other knowledge bases and their relationships is a more recent phenomenon and remains an ongoing process. The advantages of technology-knowledgedriven product concepts are thorough technological know-how and the option for innovative products. The risk, however, is that other knowledge bases may be partly neglected or totally forgotten, and the product may therefore fail (cf. Cooper, 1975; Hnninen, 2006; Hnninen et al., 2006).
2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Product Concepts Built on the Technology Knowledge Base, the End-User Knowledge Base and the Brand Knowledge Base
The importance of understanding the customer needs is one of the most widely researched topics in innovation literature. Thus, the end-user knowledge base is a necessary part of a multidimensional productconcept model. In practice, usability research as

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

402

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

part of the product innovation process offers companies a functional approach to studying the end-users relationship with the product (Scholtz & Salvador, 1998; Wood, 1998). What has been less emphasized is the experience created for the end-user by the product (Prahalad & Ramaswamy, 2003). Some rms actively trigger, monitor and guide the consumers knowledge base in order to develop and promote the adoption of successive product generations (Hnninen & Sandberg, 2006). As market has been too fuzzy a denition to cover all the market-related stakeholders exhaustively, brand has also been exploited in the product concept, for example, in product design. An enterprises brand does not exist independently of its products; at the heart of the concept of a brand is an innovatory product with the added value that this innovation creates for the end-users (Kapferer, 1994). The products values, quality, form and functional attributes all affect the brand value. The design needs to be consistent and coherent throughout, from the innovation itself to the rms entire mode of operation. The importance of the brand aspects of the product concept is growing. A strong brand is used more and more to facilitate the launching of innovative high-technology products. Cross-functional knowledge creation is raised to a new level with brand knowledge, because there are many stakeholder groups in the product innovation process, and the sharing of brand knowledge offers an option for higher integration.

Product Concepts Built on the Technology Knowledge Base, End-User Knowledge Base, Brand Knowledge Base and Business Logic Knowledge Base
Prahalad and Bettis (1986) have discussed the concept of the business logic of an industry and have emphasized the importance of conceptualizing and challenging it. Kim and Mauborgne (1997) were among the rst to stress the value of business logic as a product innovation-related attribute. Walsh (1995) sees business logic as a managerial cognition, which is dependent on the position of the company in the market. In order to avert a situation of direct competition, enterprises need to conceptualize the kinds of innovation that will be capable of changing the business logic of their industry (Hnninen & Kauranen, 2006; Kim & Mauborgne, 1997). Firms that cannot alter the prevailing rules of the market, on the other hand, must make their products comply with the dominant business logic. Business logic and business model are overlapping terms. They both dene value-creation priori-

ties with respect to the utilization of both internal and external resources, for the purpose of creating value for and with the customers. Business logic looks at value creation from the viewpoint of the market, and at the business model from the viewpoint of the rm (Wallin, 2000). What is essential is that although business logic can be inuenced by the company, it is not under the companys full control. A radically novel product concept can change power relationships within the organization profoundly (Normann, 1971). Resistance against a product innovation, and the organizational changes that it causes, can be minimized if the innovative product concept collates knowledge from many related functions. The four-dimensional product concept introduced in the present study enhances cross-functional knowledge creation, but at the same time the conceptualization process demands more integration time, good relationships between different functions and high negotiation skills. All in all, the product development literature suggests that early and widely accepted innovative multidimensional product concepts shorten the time to market (e.g. Crawford, 1996). Additional knowledge bases related to a product concept include the marketing knowledge base, manufacturing knowledge base, corporate strategy knowledge base and combinative knowledge base, among others. The combinative knowledge base is analogous to the combinative capabilities discussed by Kogut and Zander (1992). In the future development of multidimensional product concepts, these and other additional knowledge bases need to be included.

Methodology
Cross-functional knowledge creation is a challenging phenomenon to study in research. The explicit component of knowledge can typically be measured with precise quantities, but the contents of tacit knowledge include components such as skills and values, which are difcult to quantify. In the present study knowledge is dened as cross-functional knowledge if the same innovation-specic knowledge is expressed by many interviewees representing various different functions in the organization.

Questionnaire
Figure 1 sets out how the four-dimensional product-concept model introduced in the present study was translated into a research questionnaire. Technology, end-user, brand and
2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PRODUCT-CONCEPT MODEL

403

PRODUCT TECHNOLOGY -Technical solution -Features-main functions -Unique selling proposal

Name, type number, nickname Underlying technologies What solutions do the technologies offer? What critical features do the technologies offer? What are the added value functions? Is there a single unique benefit? Personality, profession, hobbies, consumerism Real-world behavioural patterns in brief How is the product really used? Which customer needs does the product satisfy? What is my experience of using the product?

END-USER -Ethnology -Usage context -Needed value -Customers experience about the product, in their own words BRAND -Promise of value -Values -Brand characters -Design hardware -Design software -Surprise BUSINESS LOGIC

-Nature of expectations, e.g. from the brand slogan -Brands main values -Concretely verifiable characters -Brand indicators of form of the product -Softwares brand characters -Something unexpected -Key drivers of profit flow -Solutions to the barriers of profit flow

Figure 1. The Four-Dimensional Product-Concept Model business logic refer to the corresponding knowledge bases. A person who has appropriated only one knowledge base will be unable to respond properly to all the questions included in the questionnaire. First, the interviewees were asked to name a unique selling proposal that is the output of the technical solution. Second, the interviewees were asked to predict end-user experiences in their own words. Responding to this question demands empathy. Third, the aim was to obtain a thorough understanding of the brand values and brand characteristics. Fourth, the business logic of the product innovation was also investigated, by asking about the commercialization capabilities of the organization. All the questions presented are listed in Appendix 1. technological director, technical manager and project manager of the case company were interviewed in person. Similarities and differences between different interviewees responses were investigated, as every interviewee had to respond to the same questions about the case product innovation. The interviews were recorded and the responses were then content-analysed and compared. The interview data was supplemented with information obtained, for example, through the Internet and from written sources.

Case Study
Product Innovation Suunto t6
The case product innovation in the present study is the training wrist computer Suunto t6, which was developed by the company Suunto Oy. Suunto Oy is part of the Amer Sports Corporation, which is an internationally operating public company, with annual sales of about 1,000 million in 2004. The background of Suunto Oy is in the compass industry, from which the company has moved on to making use of the Global Positioning Service (GPS) the satellite-supported navigation system. The Amer Sports Corporation has a strong global position in many sports, such as golf and tennis. The impulse to develop the Suunto t6 came from research results regarding top sports

Case Selection
The case product innovation was selected on the basis of recommendations by technology experts, who were given the criteria that the case should full. The framework developed in the present study was assessed by comparing it with one instrumental case (cf. Stake, 1995). The case was selected to represent successful cross-functional knowledge creation.

Data Collection
The material was collected in October 2004. The managing director, marketing director,
2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

404

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

obtained at the University of Jyvskyl. The innovation development process in the company inuenced many stakeholders internally and externally. The biggest challenges posed by the Suunto t6 were in radio signalling and user-interface development, in order to achieve the quality level set by the Suunto brand values. The Suunto t6 provides laboratory-accurate information about seven body parameters for later analysis with Suunto Training Software. The wrist unit has training control functions and memory functions. The training control functions include simultaneous display of heart rate, stop-watch and time/lap time/ countdown, adjustable heart-rate zone with alarm, and interval timer with warm-up. Memory functions include average heart rate, altitude data for total training and laps, and training history information. The wrist unit is upgradeable with wireless accessories. The Suunto Training Software provides a deeper analysis of training sessions on seven body parameters: excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC), heart rate, respiration rate, ventilation volume, oxygen intake, energy consumption and training effect. The training effect is an indicator of how much the training session improved the persons aerobic tness, especially the maximum performance of the persons cardiovascular system and the ability to resist fatigue during endurance training.

Training Effect, Virtual Trainer, Personal Coach and a playful nickname in Finnish that does not translate into English. The wide range of different nicknames indicates that within the group, which had been developing the same product for a longer time, many different perceptions of the tacit components of the product concept still existed. It seems that eliciting nicknames can serve as a method for unveiling hidden differences in the productconcept that different sub-groupings within the development group might have, even when the explicit product concept is shared throughout the group and the product development has already been completed. Clearly, a prerequisite for analysing the nickname in this fashion is that no conscious decision has yet been made on a common nickname for the product.

Technology
One of the main key features of the technical solution in the Suunto t6 is data transmission by radio waves from the body band to the wrist unit, which facilitates the economic and efcient transmission of data. This technical solution, however, is closely related to design features. For example, when radio transmission is utilized, it is not possible to use a metal case in the wrist computer. The Suunto t6 is therefore housed in a plastic case, although other Suunto products are typically cased in metal in order to promote a uniform, chic Suunto product image. This is an illustrative example of an instance where the multidimensional product concept model has an opportunity to enhance cross-functional knowledge creation in the product innovation process. The challenge of integrating the technology perspective into the development requirements of the other functions could also be seen in the interview material, as the technical solution of data transmission by radio waves was highlighted by interviewees representing the technology function but not by the other interviewees.

Results
Some results were expected, but there were also some surprises. As expected, the divisions knew their respective specic knowledge bases well. This result is almost too trivial to be presented. Most of the results, however, were unexpected. First, in this case the different divisions also knew each others elds very well. For example, the interviewees with marketing background demonstrated a profound understanding of technical issues. On the other hand, interviewees with a technical background were also able to give an in-depth response concerning the brand identity of the Suunto t6. This result indicates that cross-functional knowledge creation had happened on an even larger scale than expected. Cross-functional knowledge creation was one of the reasons for the success of the product innovation, and a shared multidimensional product concept model recognizably enhanced knowledge creation. A second unexpected nding was that the nicknames suggested spontaneously in the interviews differed considerably from each other. The following nicknames were proposed: Personal Trainer, Training Partner,

End-User
Top athletes were typically identied as endusers. Consumer experience was dened in much the same way by different respondent groups, as indicated in the following sample responses. It was not expected that the responses would be so similar to each other. The Suunto t6 is an incredible tool when you consider all the information that it gives to the user. The way it analyses training is in a class of its own.
2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PRODUCT-CONCEPT MODEL

405

I dont need to guess. I can train safely. I can avoid overtraining and train adequately. I dont just do it, I do it smarter. As a trainer, I can achieve good training results in a rational way. It is unbelievable what quantities of important information this kind of tool can show. These responses show how clear the consumer benet was for all interviewees concerning the successful product innovation. This emphasizes the importance of integrating the end-user knowledge base as a separate knowledge base into the traditional models incorporating the technology knowledge base and the market knowledge base.

interviewees. The managing director and the product manager mentioned the longer predicted payback time for this product. The innovation-base diversication was obvious in the case of the Suunto t6. Thus, it would have been useful if the business logic knowledge base could have been more widely shared and recognized within the organization. This emphasizes the usefulness of using a multidimensional product concept model and the importance of including the business logic knowledge base in this. Figure 2 summarizes the product concept of the wrist computer Suunto t6 as seen by the interviewees.

Discussion and Conclusions

Brand
Hardware-related brand indicators of the Suunto t6 include its round shape and the ve buttons logic. Software-related brand indicators, for example, are the user logic and information display. Responses conveying a surprise component varied considerably. Using the Suunto t6 has in some cases resulted in very positive experiences and in some cases caused quite strong disappointments, as indicated by the following sample points raised by the interviewees. This part of the interview is aimed at measuring consistency of the cross-functional product concept concerning brand values. Before starting to use the device, the user is required to specically turn on the radio signal. This was perceived as a surprising inconvenience to the users. By means of using the Suunto t6 it is possible to make laboratory-level measures in every-day training. For the rst time in my life I can really see how intensive my training is. Its unbelievable that its possible to display this magnitude of information. It seems that including the surprise component into the product-concept model is justied. The consistency of the responses would have been misleadingly uniform without analysing the surprise component, too. Several preliminary conclusions can be suggested based on the new theory development and the case study. First, certain dimensions of the product concept can be particularly indicative of cross-functional knowledge creation, such as a concern with the end-users experience. This result is consistent with the nding by Nonaka, Toyama and Nagata (2000), that the product concept is a rst explicit phase in the process of innovative knowledge creation. Second, the real levels of revolutionary knowledge and of awareness about the revolutionary innovation within the organization are related to the absorptive capacity of the organization. This result is consistent with research results presented by Cohen and Levinthal (1990). In the present study, the surprise component of the innovative product concept is a key indicator of the radical dimensions of the innovation. Investigating the surprise component can also be used to measure the strength of uniqueness in the selling proposal. Third, the present study suggests that the product concept may provide an early warning of innovation-based diversication. The literature on product innovation development and on diversication has not paid much attention to the value of innovative product concepts in creating diversication effects. This nding also has implications for diversication management practices. Fourth, a point that has been less discussed in the existing innovation literature is the possibility of using nicknames as indicators of cross-functional integration within the organization. The present study suggests that a nickname is a revealing indicator of tacit knowledge, since coming up with a nickname requires the verbalization of tacit subjective associations. Nicknames can be utilized as an

Business Logic
Suunto Oy launched the Suunto t6 to a new target group, with which its sales organization was previously unfamiliar. This diversication effect caused by the product innovation Suunto t6 was identied only by two of the
2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

406

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

PRODUCT

Wrist computer Suunto t6 Personal trainer

TECHNOLOGY -Technical solution

-Features -Main functions -Unique selling proposal END-USER -Ethnology -Usage context -Needed value -Customers experience of the product in their own words BRAND -Promise of value -Values -Brand characters -Design hardware -Design software -Surprise

Radio data transmission, algorithms to calculate training effects based on data between heart beats Oxygen consumption, PC software: EPOC Clock, pulse, trip Training effect Extrovert, professional athletic, high income Turn on and train, after work if as hobby Mostly for training, less promotional value Advance planning of the training, explicit specification of the target training effects I dont just train. I train smarter.

Replacing luck by controlled training impact Control, end-user added value Round shape, Suunto design Five buttons logic Suunto user interface, tailored information Laboratory-level training effect measurements in every-day training New target group, slower profit flow growth Training results for promotion, new channels

BUSINESS LOGIC

Figure 2. Summary of the Product Concept of the Wrist Computer Suunto t6 as Seen by the Interviewees

indicator of cross-functional integration in future research studies. Some additional remarks can also be made regarding the capacity of the product-concept model to measure knowledge: First, does the new product-concept model describe the future product adequately? The Suunto t6 was in the product concept phase. It had only recently been launched, and had not yet achieved market success as dened by Crawford (1996). The product-concept model described both the product innovation Suunto t6 itself, and its relationship to the four knowledge bases. The product concept based on the four knowledge bases was something deeper than a mere product idea: the product concept realistically described the product innovation in its market context, and prepared for the demands imposed by the commercialization of the product innovation. Second, does the product-concept model introduced in the present study measure knowledge in a novel way? Some features of the product can be found in the technical descriptions, but these represent merely information. Other features, such as the design parameters, predicate company-specic explicit knowledge. Drafting a denition of the end-user experiences in ones own

words, as required in the new product concept model, demands market insight, and the responses are therefore clearly based on tacit knowledge. Thus, the product-concept model now introduced does indeed measure a broad range of knowledge. The product-concept model introduced in the present study was able to measure cross-functional knowledge creation, and to identify corresponding meaningful differences between individual interviewees perceptions of the product concept, both explicit and tacit. The model describes both the radical innovative features in consumer experiences and the potential surprise elements concerning the product innovation. Such features are difcult to translate into any product conceptualization software, such as the Nortel software package (Montoya-Weiss & ODriscoll, 2000). The elicited descriptions were effective in evaluating cross-functional knowledge creation, and the qualitative responses indicated the spectrum of cognitive models being deployed. The present study also has some limitations: First, people typically know more than they can express in verbal form (Polanyi, 1966). Obviously, many essential forms of tacit knowledge, such as product development pro 2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PRODUCT-CONCEPT MODEL

407

cess skills, were not measured in the study. However, expression tasks such as those required in the conceptualizing process of the new product-concept model pose demands on conceptualizing tacit knowledge into a communicative form and sharing it. Second, the product-concept model measures only some of the relevant organizational skills. It measures organizational capabilities concerning commercializing innovations, but does not measure other resources of the organization, such as nancial or marketing resources. Third, the product-concept model is a descriptive tool, and it is therefore advisable to use, in addition, quantitative measures. For example, in the case of the present study, the sales potential of the Suunto t6 should also be evaluated, to supplement the product-concept data. Similarly, measures based on estimations such as predicted market size can increase the organizations understanding of the expected commercial success of the innovation. Fourth, the product-concept model is appropriate for providing preliminary responses in the initial stages of product development about the opportunities and challenges of the product innovation, but in the later development stages more detailed insight will be needed. This can be done by consistently using the same product-concept model and by also addressing the question by means of other, more detailed models. In this present study, the a priori framework has been discussed on the basis of one case study only. Since at this stage the results are exploratory, there is clearly a strong need to test the framework further with other case studies. However, there are doubts about the relevance of quantitative measures concerning research in cross-functional knowledgecreation, because of the decisive role of the tacit knowledge component.

Preliminary Managerial Implications

On the basis of the present research study, the following preliminary managerial implications can be presented. The product development group members should dene their personal product concepts in advance of group discussions. In Suunto Oy, this allowed a fuller utilization of the creative power of the organization and secured a greater variety of input to the cross-functional knowledge creation. From the very start of the development process, the project manager should repeatedly challenge the people involved to dene in their own words the end-users predicted
2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

experiences of using the product. This is a powerful tool in creating a better market t. Planning positive surprises when developing the new product turned out to be a useful tool for cross-functional knowledge creation in Suunto Oy. These positive surprises might include, for example, an unexpected competitive advantage to be used in marketing. This will give inspiration to the whole development team and will spur creativity in further knowledge creation. This will also help to utilize the full potential of the opportunities offered by the new technology. The product-development team should be prepared for additional demands created by the product-innovation-based diversication by analysing the barriers of commercialization in order to identify the potential increase in resources needed in various functions of the company. Suunto Oy was no different from other innovative high-technology companies in which product-innovation-based diversication was not fully acknowledged in advance. This kind of diversication cannot be avoided; but what is crucial is how prepared the organization is for the consequences of this diversication. The project manager should collect product concept views from all stakeholders in the value net of the product innovation. The widest possible range of ideas is needed for effective cross-functional knowledge creation. From an early stage of development, the product-development team should develop and agree on a well-chosen shared nickname for the product innovation idea, to be used throughout the entire product-development organization. This will enhance the integration of the shared product concept and thus the cross-functional knowledge development. This can be one method for achieving the difcult task of integrating the possibly differing tacit aspects of the product concept. To achieve an even more comprehensive measurement of the relevant organizational capabilities, the future development of the model should include additional knowledge bases such as the marketing and manufacturing knowledge base, and the combinative knowledge base.

References
Bharadwaj, S. and Menon, A. (2000) Making Innovation Happen in Organizations: Individual Creativity Mechanisms, Organizational Creativity Mechanisms or Both? Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(6), 42434. Cohen, W.M. and Levinthal, D.A. (1990) Absorptive Capacity: A New Perspective on Learning and Innovation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 35(1)

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

408

CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION MANAGEMENT

(Special Issue: Technology, Organizations, and Innovation, March), 12852. Cooper, R.G. (1975) Why New Industrial Products Fail. Industrial Marketing Management, 4(4), 315 26. Crawford, M.C. (1996) New Products Management, 5th edn. Irwin Professional Publishing, Burr Ridge, IL. Gomes, J., de WeerdNederhof, P.C., Pearson, A. and Fisscher, O.A.M. (2001) Senior Management Support in the New Product Development Process. Creativity and Innovation Management, 10(4), 23442. Hnninen, S. (2006) The Perfect Technology Syndrome: Sources, Consequences, and Solutions. International Journal of Technology Management. (forthcoming) Hnninen, S. and Kauranen, I. (2006) Product Innovation as Micro-Strategy. International Journal of Innovation and Learning. (forthcoming) Hnninen, S., Kauranen, I., Serkkola, A. and Ikvalko, J. (2006) Barrier to Commercialisation from the Four Knowledge Bases Perspective: A Study of Innovation in the Software Development Sector. International Journal of Management Practice, 2(3). (forthcoming) Hnninen, S. and Sandberg, B. (2006) Consumer Learning Roadmap: a Necessary Tool for New Products. International Journal of Knowledge and Learning, 2(3/4), 298307. Kapferer, J-N. (1994) Strategic Brand Management: New Approaches to Creating and Evaluating Brand Equity. Free Press, New York. Kim, W.C. and Mauborgne, R. (1997) Value Innovation: The Strategic Logic of High Growth. Harvard Business Review, 75(1), 10312. Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992) Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology. Organization Science, 3(3), 38397. Leonard-Barton, D. (1992) Core Capabilities and Core Rigidities: A Paradox in Managing New Product Development. Strategic Management Journal, 13(3) (Special Issue: Strategy Process), 11125. Madhavan, R. and Grover, R. (1998) From Embedded Knowledge to Embodied Knowledge: New Product Development as Knowledge Management. Journal of Marketing, 62(10), 112. Montoya-Weiss, M.M. and ODriscoll, T.M. (2000) From Experience: Applying Performance Support Technology in the Fuzzy Front End. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 17(2), 14361. Nonaka, I., Toyama, R. and Nagata, A. (2000) A Firm as a Knowledge-Creating Entity: A New Perspective on the Theory of the Firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 9(1), 120. Normann, R. (1971) Organizational Innovativeness: Product Variation and Reorientation. Administrative Science Quarterly, 16(2), 20315. Orihata, M. and Watanabe, C. (2000) The Interaction between Product Concept and Institutional Inducement: a New Driver of Product Innovation. Technovation, 20(1), 1123.

PDMA (2005) The PDMA Glossary for New Product Development. Available at: http://www. pdma.org/library/-glossary.html?PHPSESSID= 6086d8456711f44e0f4122bc5fa859d4. Polanyi, M. (1966) The Tacit Dimension. Anchor Day Books, New York. Porter, M. (1980) Competitive Strategy. Free Press, New York. Prahalad, C.K. and Bettis, R.A. (1986) The Dominant Logic: A New Linkage between Diversity and Performance. Strategic Management Journal, 7(6), 485501. Prahalad, C.K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2003) The New Frontier of Experience Innovation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(4), 1218. Scholtz, J. and Salvador, T. (1998) Systematic Creativity: A Bridge for the Gaps in the Software Development Process. In Wood, Larry (ed.), User Interface Design: Bridging the Gap from User Requirements to Design. CRC Press, Boston, IL, pp. 21544. Stake, R.E. (1995) The Art of Case Study Research. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Tushman, M.L. and Anderson, P. (1986) Technological Discontinuities and Organizational Environments. Administrative Science Quarterly, 31(3), 43965. Wallin, J. (2000) Customer Orientation and Competence Building. A doctoral dissertation, Acta Polytechnica Scandinavica, The Finnish Academy of Technology, Industrial Management Series No:6, Espoo, Finland. Walsh, J.P. (1995) Managerial and Organizational Cognition: Notes from a Trip Down Memory Lane. Organization Science, 6(3), 280321. Wood, L. (ed.) (1998) User Interface Design: Bridging the Gap from User Requirements to Design. CRC Press, Boston, IL.

Seppo Hnninen (seppo.j.hanninen@tkk.) is researcher and doctoral candidate at the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management at Helsinki University of Technology. He also has eight years of job experience as an advertising planner. His research interests include commercializing technological inventions, technology marketing and technology-based companies. Ilkka Kauranen (ilkka@ait.ac.th) is Visiting Professor at the School of Management at the Asia Institute of Technology in Thailand. He holds a professorship in Development and Management in Industry at the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management at Helsinki University of Technology. He has research interests in technology-based companies, entrepreneurship and commercializing technological inventions.

Volume 15

Number 4

2006

2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

A MULTIDIMENSIONAL PRODUCT-CONCEPT MODEL

409

Appendix 1. Research Questionaire

General questions What is the name of the product? What is the type number of the product? What is the nickname of the product? Technological questions Which are the underlying technologies? Which solutions do the technologies offer? Which critical features do the technologies offer? What are the added value functions? Is there a single unique benet? End-user questions What is the personality of the end-user? What is the profession of the end-user? Which are the hobbies of the end-user? What is the consumerism of the end-user? How do you describe the real-world behavioral patterns in brief?

How is the product really used? Which customer needs does the product satisfy? Imagine yourshelf as the end-user: What is my experience of using the product? Brand questions How do you describe the nature of expectations, e.g. from the brand slogan? Which are the main values of the brand? Which are the concretely veriable characters of the brand? Which are the brand indicators related to the physical form of the product? Which are the softwares brand characters? Does the product have something unexpected? Business-logic questions What are the key drivers of prot ow? What are the solutions to the barriers of prot ow?

2006 The Authors Journal compilation 2006 Blackwell Publishing

Volume 15

Number 4

2006