You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
Organization Strategy and Structural Differences for Radical versus Incremental Innovation
John E. Ettlie, William P. Bridges and Robert D. O'Keefe
Vol. 30, No. 6 (Jun., 1984), pp. 682-695
Published by: INFORMS
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2631748
Page Count: 14
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Technological innovation, Technology policy, Innovation adoption, Product innovation, Packaging, Business innovation, Formalization, Adoption, Product introduction, Bridges
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Preview not available
The purpose of this study was to test a model of the organizational innovation process that suggests that the strategy-structure causal sequence is differentiated by radical versus incremental innovation. That is, unique strategy and structure will be required for radical innovation, especially process adoption, while more traditional strategy and structure arrangements tend to support new product introduction and incremental process adoption. This differentiated theory is strongly supported by data from the food processing industry. Specifically, radical process and packaging adoption are significantly promoted by an aggressive technology policy and the concentration of technical specialists. Incremental process adoption and new product introduction tends to be promoted in large, complex, decentralized organizations that have market dominated growth strategies. Findings also suggest that more traditional structural arrangements might be used for radical change initiation if the general tendencies that occur in these dimensions as a result of increasing size can be delayed, briefly modified, or if the organization can be partitioned structurally for radical vs. incremental innovation. In particular, centralization of decision making appears to be necessary for radical process adoption along with the movement away from complexity toward more organizational generalists. This suggests that a greater support of top managers in the innovation process is necessary to initiate and sustain radical departures from the past for that organization.
Management Science © 1984 INFORMS