TY - JOUR
T1 - Product–process matrix and complementarity approach
AU - Guisado-González, Manuel
AU - Wright, Len Tiu
AU - Guisado-Tato, Manuel
PY - 2017/6
Y1 - 2017/6
N2 - The relationship between different types of innovation is analysed from three different approaches. On the one hand, the distinctive view assumes that the determinants of each type of innovation are different and therefore there is no relationship between them. On the other hand, the integrative view considers that the different types of innovation are complementary. Finally, the product–process matrix framework suggests that the relationship between product innovation and process innovation is substitutive. Using data from Spain belonging to the Technological Innovation Panel (PITEC) for the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012, we tested which of the three approaches is predominant. To perform the hypothesis test, we used the so-called complementarity approach. We find that there is no unique relation. The nature of the relationship depends on the types of innovation that interact. Our most significant finding is that the relationship between product innovation and process innovation is complementary. This finding contradicts the proposal of the product–process matrix framework. Consequently, the joint implementation of both types of innovation generates a greater impact on the performance of a company than the sum of their separate implementations.
AB - The relationship between different types of innovation is analysed from three different approaches. On the one hand, the distinctive view assumes that the determinants of each type of innovation are different and therefore there is no relationship between them. On the other hand, the integrative view considers that the different types of innovation are complementary. Finally, the product–process matrix framework suggests that the relationship between product innovation and process innovation is substitutive. Using data from Spain belonging to the Technological Innovation Panel (PITEC) for the years 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011 and 2012, we tested which of the three approaches is predominant. To perform the hypothesis test, we used the so-called complementarity approach. We find that there is no unique relation. The nature of the relationship depends on the types of innovation that interact. Our most significant finding is that the relationship between product innovation and process innovation is complementary. This finding contradicts the proposal of the product–process matrix framework. Consequently, the joint implementation of both types of innovation generates a greater impact on the performance of a company than the sum of their separate implementations.
KW - Complementarity approach
KW - Organizational innovation
KW - Process innovation
KW - Product innovation
KW - Product–process matrix
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84940988686&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://link.springer.com/journal/10961
U2 - 10.1007/s10961-015-9435-6
DO - 10.1007/s10961-015-9435-6
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84940988686
VL - 42
SP - 441
EP - 459
JO - Journal of Technology Transfer
JF - Journal of Technology Transfer
SN - 0892-9912
IS - 3
ER -