Modelling the innovation process

An empirical comparison of approaches

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

85 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Research into the innovation process requires models of the process which accurately describe, and can reliably be applied to, real examples of innovation in organizations. In this paper two models are compared empirically in terms of reliability and accuracy. The first (Zaltman, Duncan & Holbek, 1973) follows the traditional approach of depicting the process in a series of discrete stages. The second (Schroeder, Van de Ven, Scudder & Polley, 1989) shows the process to be more fluid, without a fixed sequence of stages. The models are applied to case histories of seven innovations observed in a longitudinal study of a hospital ward. Inter‐rater reliability is higher for Schroeder's model, while overall support across raters tends to be stronger for the individual stages of Zaltman's model. However, there are problems with the sequence of stages in the latter model. Future research should aim to develop empirically‐grounded models based on a wide range of different innovations. 

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)89-100
Number of pages12
JournalJournal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology
Volume65
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 1992
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Longitudinal Studies
Research
Innovation process
Modeling
Innovation

Cite this

@article{43d841e602b84ea0847e5eb8350a0873,
title = "Modelling the innovation process: An empirical comparison of approaches",
abstract = "Research into the innovation process requires models of the process which accurately describe, and can reliably be applied to, real examples of innovation in organizations. In this paper two models are compared empirically in terms of reliability and accuracy. The first (Zaltman, Duncan & Holbek, 1973) follows the traditional approach of depicting the process in a series of discrete stages. The second (Schroeder, Van de Ven, Scudder & Polley, 1989) shows the process to be more fluid, without a fixed sequence of stages. The models are applied to case histories of seven innovations observed in a longitudinal study of a hospital ward. Inter‐rater reliability is higher for Schroeder's model, while overall support across raters tends to be stronger for the individual stages of Zaltman's model. However, there are problems with the sequence of stages in the latter model. Future research should aim to develop empirically‐grounded models based on a wide range of different innovations. ",
author = "Nigel King",
year = "1992",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1111/j.2044-8325.1992.tb00487.x",
language = "English",
volume = "65",
pages = "89--100",
journal = "Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology",
issn = "0963-1798",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",
number = "2",

}

Modelling the innovation process : An empirical comparison of approaches. / King, Nigel.

In: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, Vol. 65, No. 2, 06.1992, p. 89-100.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Modelling the innovation process

T2 - An empirical comparison of approaches

AU - King, Nigel

PY - 1992/6

Y1 - 1992/6

N2 - Research into the innovation process requires models of the process which accurately describe, and can reliably be applied to, real examples of innovation in organizations. In this paper two models are compared empirically in terms of reliability and accuracy. The first (Zaltman, Duncan & Holbek, 1973) follows the traditional approach of depicting the process in a series of discrete stages. The second (Schroeder, Van de Ven, Scudder & Polley, 1989) shows the process to be more fluid, without a fixed sequence of stages. The models are applied to case histories of seven innovations observed in a longitudinal study of a hospital ward. Inter‐rater reliability is higher for Schroeder's model, while overall support across raters tends to be stronger for the individual stages of Zaltman's model. However, there are problems with the sequence of stages in the latter model. Future research should aim to develop empirically‐grounded models based on a wide range of different innovations. 

AB - Research into the innovation process requires models of the process which accurately describe, and can reliably be applied to, real examples of innovation in organizations. In this paper two models are compared empirically in terms of reliability and accuracy. The first (Zaltman, Duncan & Holbek, 1973) follows the traditional approach of depicting the process in a series of discrete stages. The second (Schroeder, Van de Ven, Scudder & Polley, 1989) shows the process to be more fluid, without a fixed sequence of stages. The models are applied to case histories of seven innovations observed in a longitudinal study of a hospital ward. Inter‐rater reliability is higher for Schroeder's model, while overall support across raters tends to be stronger for the individual stages of Zaltman's model. However, there are problems with the sequence of stages in the latter model. Future research should aim to develop empirically‐grounded models based on a wide range of different innovations. 

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84986706392&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1992.tb00487.x

DO - 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1992.tb00487.x

M3 - Article

VL - 65

SP - 89

EP - 100

JO - Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

JF - Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology

SN - 0963-1798

IS - 2

ER -