Radical Innovation Literature Review

The prime goal of a review is to show how the researcher has a good grasp of knowledge from major published work regarding his/her research topic (Baker, 2016). A lit review isn’t just a description of what other scholars have done in a summarized format, but it entails critical discussions, illustrating insight and awareness of differing theories, arguments, and approaches (Torraco, 2016). On the other hand, synthesis involves analysing, critical evaluation, comparing, contrasting and combining ideas from past studies to form an integrated theory or system about the certain topic. A complete review must entail the synthesis and analysis of the appropriate publications, linked at all times to a scholar’s own purpose and a rationale (Torraco, 2016). Lit review plays a significant role in any research as it enhances conceptual sensitivity, tightens study questions, suggests areas for theoretical sampling and affirms the findings that can be used to indicate if the current literature is incorrect, partial or simplistic (Baker, 2016).

It develops a body of literature that inaugurates a contrarian perspective. In social sciences, investigations such as immigration control and educational reforms, the argumentative review can be an appropriate and significant form of the dissertation (Ferrari, 2015). Methodological reviews focus on the method of analysis the scholar used and not the content (Baker, 2016). The technique offers a unique framework of understanding at various stages i. e. The step of writing an integrated review Torraco (2016) highlights steps that a researcher must follow while writing a literature review using an integrate review approach. Step one: Summary of key research Here, the requirement of the scholar is to research about the previous articles regarding the topic of study and make a brief summary of the arguments, main points, and study finding as stated by researchers in their works.

The research gives a clear, short overview of what previous scholars did by outlining the main topics and major arguments. Step two: Evaluation After summarizing the study findings in step one, the scholar assesses and evaluates the summary of the key research in regard to the topic of study. The requirement of the researcher is to support his/her evaluation using research by acknowledging opinions which agree with the thesis. In addition, the method and objective of gathering data may not be applicable to the present condition thus not meeting the study needs (Cheng & Phillips, 2014). Part II Invention and Innovations Invention and innovation play a momentous role in improving an organization operations and the quality of goods and services. Well, Snyder, Gustafsson, Fombelle, and Kristensson (2016) define an invention as a process or an act of a firm creating, discovering or designing a brand new product, a service or process that has never existed before.

They observed that this can be an improvement upon a product or a new process of producing a product. While innovation is a process of transforming an idea into reality, i. Managers encounter several management problems which often lead to the failure of most radical innovation projects. Only 20 percent of all radical, disruptive innovation projects are successful, while a significant number discontinued for failing to meet end product (Hahn, Jensen &Tanev, 2014). Implementing an idea into a reality is one of hardest task. Allahar (2017) states that writing an idea down on a broadsheet is too easy but putting it into practices or transforming it into end product requires a huge amount of resources, high uncertainties and other factors which determines its success.

Also, radical innovation significantly impacts market space. The radical innovation significantly improves the organization performance and quality which gives it a competitive advantage in market space. He also observes that this type of innovation is linked with the high level of uncertainties. O'Connor and Rice (2013) carried out an investigation to examine uncertainty associated with radical innovation. They examined 12 radical innovation projects in ten big U. S. He observes that disruptive innovations are associated with high initial cost and running cost. The findings strongly agree that radical innovation poses a high level of financial demand which requires managers to have appropriate managerial skills, the process and correct tools to cut down the cost. Nagano, Stefanovitz, and Vick (2014), carried out an empirical research on the innovation management process in a radical innovation environment; internal and contextual factors.

The prime objective of the investigation was to investigate challenge managers encounter and how they act in response to those problems in disruptive innovation. The findings show that radical innovation is coupled with quality, safety, high cost, non-conformity to specification and planning challenges which engender delays. Lack of proper managerial skills to confront high uncertainty level and high monetary demand are the prime causes of failure of many radical innovation projects. Issues of Knowledge Transfer Another problem manager faces in a disruptive innovation environment is the issue of knowledge transfer. Bergek, Berggren, Magnusson, and Hobday (2013) conducted an empirical research on some of the challenges which lead to project discontinuities in a radical innovation environment. They observe that incomplete knowledge transfer is between the suppliers, or external consultants and the project team.

The findings show that often people from consultancy refuses to sell their knowledge since most projects can’t afford to pay them. Their findings agree that an incomplete transfer of knowledge in an innovation project leads to failure of a radical innovation project. Chalmers (2013) conducted an exploratory study on the barriers faced by the management in a radical innovation. The paper starts by highlighting the vital role management must play to effectively manage a radical project. While analysing some of the barriers in an innovation project, the paper notes that most projects have failed due to lack of complete information transfer. They sum that before the deployment of any innovation project, the project manager must ensure it has the right workforce and has the rightful information required for completing the project.

The paper notes that, though radical innovation significantly improves the organization performance and quality which gives it a competitive advantage in market space, but requires the manager to adopt effective strategies to evade these problems. The study concludes that one way to ensure complete knowledge transfer in a project, the managers must ascertain the quality of the documentation received by the knowledge provider. DaSilva, Trkman, Desouza, and Lindič (2013) carried out an investigation to examine disruptive technologies. Their study examined 25 radical innovation projects in ten big U. S. Poor communication, lack of appropriate tools and language barrier are the main cause of inadequate knowledge integration (Sandström, Berglund, & Magnusson, 2014). The project manager must ensure effective communication among project teams to attain successful multifunctional knowledge integration.

Bergek, Berggren, Magnusson, and Hobday (2013) conducted an empirical research on some of the challenges which lead to project discontinuities in a radical innovation environment. The study findings found that inadequate knowledge transfer is one of the barriers to project manager encounters. The paper notes that there is a significant incomplete knowledge transfer between the suppliers, or external consultants and the project team. The paper states that the project manager plays a significant role in ensuring the success of any project. The paper suggests that the management team be at the forefront in ensuring that innovation is running effectively and efficiently. Lack of qualified personnel Another challenge in a disruptive innovation environment is acquiring qualified staffs to work on the project. Pinkse and Kolk (2014) noted that to carry out a successful innovation project, a firm requires highly skilled personnel.

However, hiring the most competent employees in the most challenges all project managers encounter. Sandberg and Aarikka-Stenroos (2014) noted that most disruptive projects take more time than it had been anticipated. Since the project involves developing something totally new, most project manager finds it more difficulty setting the exact time when the project will be completed (Sgourev, 2013). Martinsuo, Korhonen, and Laine (2014), observed that most innovative projects take a long time before they are completed. They also noted that a significant number of deployments fail to be completed totally. Goffin and Mitchell (2016) conducted an investigation duration it takes to execute a disruptive innovation and some of the effective approaches and implementation that can be enacted to ensure success innovation projects. The paper notes that favorable policies foster innovations.

This study states that a firm which has a good relationship with the government stands a higher chance to succeed. Resource allocation Another problem manager encounters in a disruptive innovation environment is resource allocation. The resources include the right equipment, human resource, capital and time resource. In his paper (Kunamaneni, 2018) notes that managing resources effectively and efficiently in an innovation environment is a major problem most project managers encounter. Study findings indicated that a significant number of the new products were rejected for not meeting current consumers’ need. The paper notes that consumer needs and wants keep on changing from time to time which renders some product to be absolute when they are introduced in the market space. In conclusion from the previous studies, it can denote that major managerial challenges in a radical innovation environment include; high level of uncertainties, high initial costs, lack of qualified personnel, incomplete information transfer, government policies, resource allocation and lengthy development timeframes.

References Allahar, H. Academic Publishing, Internet Technology, and Disruptive Innovation. The Purpose, Process, and Methods of Writing a Literature Review.  AORN Journal, 103(3), 265-269. doi: 10. 1016/j. aorn.  Knowledge Integration and Innovation: Critical Challenges Facing International Technology-Based Firms, 246. Bessant, J. , Öberg, C. , &Trifilova, A. Framing problems in radical innovation. The challenges of innovation capability building: Learning from longitudinal studies of innovation efforts at Renault and Volvo Cars.  Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 31, 120-140. Bowers, J. , &Khorakian, A. Integrating risk management in the innovation project. 1/90745 Chen, H. , Liu, H. , & Cheung, H. Radical innovation, market forces, political and business relationships.  Chinese Management Studies, 8(2), 218-240. E. , & McDonald, R. What is a disruptive innovation? Harvard Business Review, 93(12), 44-53. Colombo, M. , von Krogh, G. , &Lindič, J. Disruptive technologies: a business model perspective on cloud computing.

 Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 25(10), 1161-1173. Deffains-Crapsky, C. , &Sudolska, A. Elmualim, A. , & Gilder, J. BIM: innovation in design management, influence, and challenges of implementation.  Architectural Engineering and design management, 10(3-4), 183-199. Engen, M. 000000000329 Goffin, K. , & Mitchell, R.  Innovation management: effective strategy and implementation. Macmillan International Higher Education. Hahn, F. Functional food product development–Opportunities and challenges for food manufacturers.  Trends in food science & technology, 30(1), 27-37. Khanagha, S. , Volberda, H. , Sidhu, J.  International Journal Of Innovation Management, 1950028. doi: 10. 1142/s1363919619500282 Kyriakopoulos, K. , Hughes, M. , & Hughes, P. , &Moura, H. A systematic review of uncertainties in software project management.  arXiv preprint arXiv:1412. Marshall, S. J. doi: 10. 22190/fulp1604483m Nagano, M. S. , Stefanovitz, J. P. C. , & Rice, M. P. A comprehensive model of uncertainty associated with radical innovation.

 Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30, 2-18. , & Lamming, R. Beyond the steady state: managing discontinuous product and process innovation.  International Journal of Innovation Management, 10(02), 175-196. Pinkse, J. , Bohnsack, R. pdf Ritala, P. , &Hurmelinna‐Laukkanen, P. Incremental and radical innovation in coopetition—The role of absorptive capacity and appropriability.  Journal of Product Innovation Management, 30(1), 154-169. Robbins, P. Saguy, I. S. Challenges and opportunities in food engineering: Modeling, virtualization, open innovation and social responsibility.  Journal of food engineering, 176, 2-8. Sandberg, B. 12092 Selig, C. J. , Stettina, C. J. , &Baltes, G.  Journal Of Product Innovation Management, 31(3), 552-566. doi: 10. 1111/jpim. 12113 Snyder, H. , Witell, L. , Daniels, K. , Zolkiewski, J. , & Dainty, A. R. The barriers and consequences of radical innovations: Introduction to the issue.  Corporate Governance, 13(5), 467-481. Teece, D.