A modified lead-user approach for new product development: An illustration from the US of a marketing research tool for the forest industry

Abstract

Innovation is critical for firm success, including forest sector firms. However, historically forest sector firms have focused on process over product innovations. Additionally, research shows that forest sector firms often fail to have a structured new product development (NPD) process. The purpose of this work is to illustrate use of the lead-user method to identify user-lead ideas for innovation within the wood-window value chain, thereby demonstrating the potential of a modified lead-user approach as a NPD tool for the forest industry. Personal interviews with 22 individuals were conducted with sales agents, installation experts, homebuilders, and architects. Findings outline opportunities for the introduction of new products/services, thereby demonstrating the value of relying on lead-users for identifying potential products. This study also highlights the challenges associated with the lead-user methodology, including the varying definitions of a lead-user and the subjective nature of categorising someone as a lead-user.

Keywords

New product development Innovation Lead-users

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Andrew

J. P.

, Sirkin

H. L.

, Haanaes

and Michael

D. C.

2007. Innovation 2007: A BCG Senior Management Survey. Boston, MA: The Boston Consulting Group, 32.

Baldwin

, Hienerth

and Von Hippel

2006. How user innovations become commercial products: a theoretical investigation and case study. Research Policy. 35(9): 1291–1313.

Barriball

K. L.

and While

1994. Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: a discussion paper. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 19(2): 328–335.

Bogers

, Afuah

and Bastian

2010. Users as innovators: a review, critique, and future research directions. Journal of Management. 36(4): 857–875.

Bull

and Ferguson

2006. Factors influencing the success of wood product innovations in Australia and New Zealand. Forest Policy and Economics. 8(7): 742–750.

Crawford

and Di Benedetto

2006. New Products Management. 8th edn. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 540.

Crespell

, Knowles

and Hansen

2006. Innovation in the North American sawmilling industry. Forest Science. 52(5): 568–578.

Dobni

C. B.

2010. The relationship between and innovation orientation and competitive strategy. International Journal of Innovation Management. 14(2): 331–357.

Dodgson

, Gann

D. M.

and Phillips

2014. Perspectives on innovation management. In: Dodgson

, Gann

D. M.

and Phillips

(eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 3–25.

10.

Faullant

, Schwarz

E. J.

, Krajger

and Breitenecker

R. J.

2012. Towards a comprehensive understanding of lead userness: the search for individual creativity. Creativity and Innovation Management. 21(1): 76–92.

11.

Fell

, Tokarczyk

and Hansen

2007. User Innovation and Modification of Woodbased Construction Materials. Vancouver, BC: Forintek Canada Corp. (FPInnovations). [Project No. 5407].

12.

Franke

2014. User-driven innovation. In: Dodgson

, Gann

D. M.

and Phillips

(eds), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation Management. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 83–101.

13.

Franke

, von Hippel

and Schreier

2006. Finding commercially attractive user innovations: a test of lead-user theory. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 23(4): 301–315.

14.

Gruner

K. E.

and Homburg

2000. Does customer interaction Enhance new product success? Journal of Business Research. 49(1): 1–14.

15.

Grunert

K. G.

, Jensen

B. B.

, Sonne

A. M.

, Brunsø

, Byrne

D. V.

, Clausen

and Scholderer

2008. User-oriented innovation in the food sector: relevant streams of research and an agenda for future work. Trends in Food Science & Technology. 19(11): 590–602.

16.

Han

J. K.

, Kim

and Srivastava

R. K.

1998. Market orientation and organizational performance: is innovation a missing link? Journal of Marketing. 62(4): 30–45.

17.

Hansen

2006. The state of the art innovation and new product development in the North American lumber and panel industry. Wood and Fiber Science. 38(2): 325–333.

18.

Hansen

2014. Innovativeness in the face of decline: performance implications. International Journal of Innovation Management. 18(4): 20.

19.

Hansen

and Bull

2010. An illustration of lessons for forest sector researchers and managers from current new product development research. Journal of Forest Products Business Research. 7(4): 1–7.

20.

Hansen

, Juslin

and Knowles

2007. Innovativeness in the global forest products industry: exploring new insights. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 37(8): 1324–1335.

21.

Hansen

, Nybakk

and Panwar

2014. Innovation insights from North American forest sector research: a literature review. Forests. 5(6): 1341–1355.

22.

Hansen

, Nybakk

, Bull

, Crespell

, Jélvez

and Knowles

2010. A multinational investigation of softwood sawmilling innovativeness. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research. 26: 278–287.

23.

Herstatt

and von Hippel

1992. From experience: developing new product concepts via the lead user method: a case study in a “Low Tech” field. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 9(3): 213–221.

24.

Hurley

R. G.

and Hult

G. T. M.

1998. Innovation, market orientation, and organizational learning: an integrated and empirical examination. Journal of Marketing. 62(3): 42–54.

25.

Knowles

, Hansen

and Shook

2008. Assessing innovativeness in the North American softwood sawmilling industry using three methods. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 38(2): 363–375.

26.

Lilien

G. L.

, Morrison

P. D.

, Searls

, Sonnack

and Von Hippel

2002. Performance assessment of the lead user idea-generation process for new product development. Management Science. 48(8): 1042–1059.

27.

Miles

M. B.

, Huberman

A. M.

and Saldana

2014. Qualitative Data Analysis, A Methods Sourcebook. 3rd edn. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc..

28.

Morrison

P. D.

, Roberts

J. H.

and Midgley

D. F.

2004. The nature of lead users and measurement of leading edge status. Research Policy. 33(2): 351–362.

29.

National Innovation Initiative (NII) . 2004. Innovate America. National innovation Initiative Report, Thriving in a World of Challenge and Change. 68 Washington, DC: Council on Competitiveness.

30.

Nybakk

, Hansen

, Treu

and Aase

2015. Chemical supplier's perspectives and impact on innovation in the wood treating industry. Wood and Fiber Science. 47(1): 31–43.

31.

Rogers

E. M.

2010. Diffusion of Innovations. New York: Simon and Schuster.

32.

Schaan

and Anderson

2002. Innovation in the forest sector. The Forestry Chronicle. 78(1): 60–64.

33.

Schreier

and Prügl

2008. Extending lead-user theory: antecedents and consequences of consumers’ lead userness. Journal of Product Innovation Management. 25(4): 331–346.

34.

Stendahl

, Roos

and Hugosson

2007. Product development in the Swedish and Finnish sawmilling industry – a qualitative study of managerial perceptions. Journal of Forest Products Business Research. 4(4): 24.

35.

Ulwick

A. W.

2002. Turn customer input into innovation. Harvard Business Review. 80(1): 91–97.

36.

Urban

G. L.

and Von Hippel

1988. Lead user analyses for the development of new industrial products. Management Science. 34(5): 569–582.

37.

Välimäki

, Niskanen

, Ternonen

and Laurila

2004. Indicators of innovativeness and enterprise competitiveness in the wood products industry of Finland. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research. 19(5): 1–7.

38.

von Hippel

1986. Lead users: a source of novel product concepts. Management Science. 32(7): 791–805.

39.

von Hippel

2005. Democratizing Innovation. 204 Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

40.

Yin

1994. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 2nd edn. 171 Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.