Innovation And New Product Development In Restructuring The Business Essay Example

present the selected research method.

Study Outcomes

Chapter four will describe the outcomes of this study.

Conclusion and Recommendations

Chapter five will present the conclusion and recommendations.

Technology-based industries, including cameras, mobile phones, and laptops, are working towards altering product life cycles and globalization. It is clear that these administrations must enhance their innovation and creativity to succeed in the fiercely competitive market. The ability to innovate through creativity is crucial for success in the modern world, benefiting both organizations and 21st-century economies.

According to Mumford and Gustafson (1988), creativity and innovation are experiencing rapid growth in the modern world. Amabile (1998) defines innovation as the successful implementation of creative ideas within a company. Product innovation, which is driven by ideas and aims to enhance consumer utility, is a tangible reality. However, it is doubtful whether actual consumer utility increases when a new product innovation enters the market. Unless effectively marketed, customers may not perceive the growth of the new product.

Today, innovation encompasses more than just new products or services. It also includes new business models. Business innovation focuses on how products or services are created or how they are funded. A prime example is Google, where advertising revenue funds the service, so users or customers do not have to pay for it. Another example is the fashion chain ZARA, which innovates its business model by keeping clothing lines in stores for a few weeks and then modifying them for the following weeks.

This company is skilled at coming up with new ideas to attract clients. According to Granstrand et al. (1997), it is argued that innovation does not necessarily detract from the focus on the organization's core competencies. Rather,

the management of the company should not confuse technological innovation with product innovation as a general rule to avoid such a possibility. This is highly relevant to the mobile phone company, which should handle technological innovation and product innovation separately. It is crucial to follow a procedure for any creative process; otherwise, success will rely on luck or chance. By utilizing a system, an organization can harness creative problem-solving abilities and achieve profit or gain market share.

However, for a small niche company, it may not be very important, although it is critical for some companies who are aiming for a share in a highly competitive market, such as a telecommunication company. For this reason, the innovation process will be used. The process consists of the following stages according to marketing concept:

• Idea generation
• Idea screening
• Development of idea
• Launch and post-launch review.

The set of recommendations that will be presented will address the needs of each of these stages. It is not enough to simply tell a company to follow this process since there is much variety in the methods of implementation. Innovation can be of two types.

According to Ben and Radford (2002), innovation can be tangible, such as new merchandise development, or intangible, such as new services and new work exercises. They state that innovation encompasses new or improved products, management, processes, and organizational development. Hamel and Getz (2004) add that innovation can also include services and business model inventions. Additionally, Hesselbein et al. (2002) propose two more forms of innovation: technology and organizational innovation.

An invention procedure goes through an administration to

achieve a goal. It is important to understand the value of innovation within the business. Innovation is crucial to businesses and receives support from various sources. According to Bean and Radford (2002), it is evident that innovation is the lifeblood of organizational adaptation. The development of a new business was examined for potential similarities in the process.

Despite their apparent differences, the distinctions between an industrialist establishing a new venture and the invention expedition are crucial and limiting. According to Sharma (1999), a new business lacks the bureaucratic and risk-averse nature of an existing business. Similarly, large companies may lack the flexibility found in small entrepreneurial ventures. However, Sharma (1999) argues that they have limited access to the resources available in larger and more established firms.

In recent years, there has been significant growth in innovation and the implementation of advanced organizational practices. However, innovation within a business may sometimes be limited. Williams (1999) argues that continued innovation practices often result in one-dimensional innovations. Despite this, McAdam et al. suggest that...

According to (2000), continuous improvement aid is essential for developing advanced administrations. As stated by Annacchino (2003), a product plan includes time periods, opportunities, and resource requirements through the New Product Development (NPD) process. The success of a new product relies on creativity and the best practice of innovation. Additionally, Annacchino (2003) argues that administration's recent NPD movement is more effective when it assists the organization.

At this stage, intangible invention can be overlooked. It is assuming that the active frame of R ; A ; D and merchandise procedure requires sublimating. However, these are missing in the internal invention of the common administration who wants

to understand invention. Rogers ( 2003 ) clarified a suitable model which helps identify the process of invention.

The following page presents the five steps in this theoretical model that outline an individual's progress during an innovation:

1. Knowledge: This is the first step in the model. According to Rogers (2003), knowledge refers to the introduction of an innovation and the importance of understanding it. It occurs when an organization or individual becomes aware of disappointment or failure. Zaltman et al. (1973) emphasize that organizations implementing the innovation process need to be aware of its claims and benefits.
2. Persuasion: This step focuses on the positive and negative forms of innovation. It reflects an individual's attitude towards innovation rather than just having knowledge about it. Persuasion involves analyzing the implications of the innovation and seeking more information for evaluation.
3. Decision: The third step is decision-making, which involves predicting the future of an innovation. Rogers (2003) in his model presents two clear choices – adopting or rejecting the innovation. If the organization decides to reject it, the process ends here. However, if the innovation is adopted, it moves to the next level.

The administration may find the decision-making process more difficult than an individual. This is because the administration may face challenges such as resistance to change and lack of support for the new model.

significant benefits in overcoming challenges.

If there is any dissatisfaction with the consequence or struggle of information, the invention procedure can be terminated (Rogers, 2003). According to Rogers (2003), an organization can abandon an invention at any time by following these five steps. This theoretical model of the invention determination process helps organizations implement the invention procedure within the company systematically instead of engaging in unplanned inventions. These five steps are essential for restructuring the organization's invention procedure. However, it is important to note that while this point is significant, it may hinder the original business operations during the implementation of the invention process. Nevertheless, Rogers (2003) provides a valuable structure through his invention determination process theoretical model for the purpose of this study.

The implementation of the procedure all the way through is facilitated by this theoretical model. Woodside and Biemans ( 2005 ), in an organizational perspective, utilized this innovation decision process model. The success of the innovation process relies on its alignment with the organization's culture, environment, and structure. Therefore, according to Senge ( 1992 ), the concept of organizational learning helps integrate organizational and individual skills to drive significant change in a competitive business environment. In order to foster team development in the twenty-first century, Kotter ( 1996 ) suggests that adaptability, flexibility, and accessibility should be embraced by companies.

According to Williams (1999), the need for innovation generation and rewarding efforts, such as admiration, opportunities to solve further innovations or financial benefits, is emphasized. There are several

steps that can potentially lead to excellent results during the innovation journey. Hamel (2000) suggests that by exchanging ideas with line managers, developing a business concept, seeking support and structuring functional events in a structured process, success can be achieved. Pinchot and Pellman (1999) distinguish that finding the optimal combination of innovation and achieving long-term goals greatly depends on ensuring all resources are allocated to the structured process. The overall success of innovation relies on the practices adopted during the innovation expedition.

The lack of ways and limited literature on developing advanced administrations can hinder the identification of barriers that may impede the innovation process. Conversely, support for advanced administrations can be provided through various means. Christensen and Raynor (2003) propose that the influences on the innovation process can be summarized as follows:

• Tangible resources required for success, such as assets, people, and materials.
• Procedures that facilitate interaction, coordination, and communication.
• Values that recognize the differences between new and old needs, including the culture and standards for decision making.

Resistance to change and challenges with existing processes are the main barriers to the innovation process. According to Christensen and Raynor (2003), if the innovation process does not succeed, it is primarily due to unqualified directors and administrations lacking an understanding of the value of innovation.

Incorporating advanced activities into daily routines without compromising efficiency is a challenge. The literature review confirms that for a business to survive and grow, innovation is crucial. However, the process of unlocking innovation value is influenced by internal factors. Current literature primarily focuses on

innovative administration or theoretical concepts, but often overlooks practical aspects of implementing innovation within a company. Ultimately, innovation transforms businesses and must be managed effectively.

When there is a change in administration, opposition arises. Analyzing the proper invention scheme can help overcome restrictions and improve effectiveness in the business. The opportunity for an invention scheme provides a deeper understanding of its value.

Methodology

The previous chapter explained how the invention procedure works within the company, focusing on the literature review.

This chapter focuses on research inquiries, aims, and the research model hypothesis. The study considers two types of data: primary data and secondary data. Primary data refers to information gathered specifically for this research, while secondary data refers to already collected information for other purposes such as census studies, trade publications, subscription services, internet searches, discussions with business people via phone or email, and previous analyses.

The qualitative nature of the research aims to uncover insights into innovation strategies within businesses. Qualitative research becomes valuable when current information may not provide valid results. Statistical and numerical methods were rejected in favor of descriptive results desired for this study.

Therefore, this qualitative research will be conducted using secondary data including previous analyses, discussions with business people via phone or email, and internet searches. This report is based on analysis of secondary data.

All the information and resources used here have been gathered from old research workers who published their findings in various diaries, books, and websites. According to Marshall and Rossman (1999), conducting qualitative research helps establish a reliable and consistent theoretical model. Theory aids in describing objectives and outlining strategies based on subjective meanings. Rogers (2003) argues that having a theoretical framework

grounds analytical decisions made during the innovation decision-making process. In any creative process, it is crucial to follow a defined process to avoid relying solely on chance and luck for success. Implementing a system allows an organization to harness its creative problem-solving abilities, resulting in profit or market share gain.

The model of the invention procedure will be applied, consisting of several phases. There are numerous approaches to this, but creativity and diversity play a crucial role. It can be seen as organized chaos, where ideas are filtered based on company mentality and research.

Only those who are confident will succeed while the others will fail. This phase requires the participation of everyone, from the provider to the consumer. Dedicated teams and leaders are set up. A prototype is created and public tests are meticulously planned. Evaluation of product performance, testing assumptions, and tangible usage are closely analyzed to measure against the value chain. This research is conducted using qualitative methods, which also yield valuable data.

According to Miles and Huberman (1994), gathering secondary information for research helps to understand various systems and enrich the research study. This study proposes that using a structured model, which may be distorted, is important in finding specific applications. Roger's (2003) Innovation-Decision Process model is a competent model that includes significant steps and provides a broad perspective. This model focuses on the practical and actual steps involved in the innovation journey. The aim of this study is to explain the innovation scenario within an organization. This methodology involves following several procedures to prepare a meaningful report.

The scope of this research was limited to secondary information only, which restricted the study to outcome

systems. Therefore, like any other survey, this study has limitations. However, the following factors are the main weaknesses of this research:

• The main limitation is the time constraint.
• Lack of secondary data.
• Lack of any primary data investigation.

Results and remedies

This chapter presents the results of this study. The results are prepared to focus on the objectives of the study, which are to identify the process of innovation within companies and the successful innovation outcomes. In order to be perceived as an innovative company by consumers, the company must be market driven.

This means producing goods that the consumers want or need instead of producing goods that the company is best at producing cost effectively (manufacture driven). Pursuing a market driven strategy will mean that the company has to be responsive to changes in the market and the best way to achieve this is by following the innovation process with each stage working effectively towards a goal of satisfying the customer. In order to ensure effective implementation of change towards an innovative culture, it is essential to undertake an in-depth analysis of the company's operations and strategic position as a starting point. A thorough examination of the macro and micro aspects of the business need to be carried out to identify the issues that could potentially impact on the business and understand the many different influences encompassed in the environment. This can be carried out using the analytical tools. PESTLE: This framework categorizes environmental influences into four types, political, environmental, social and technological (Johnson and Scholes,

2002).

The pest analysis will be used to examine future impacts of these factors compared to their past impacts. Swot: According to Johnson and Scholes (2002), the grind analysis summarizes the key issues in the business environment and the strategic capabilities of an organization that are most likely to affect strategy development. This helps the company determine how well their current strengths and weaknesses can handle threats or take advantage of opportunities in the business environment. Porters FIVE Forces: This analysis helps understand the competitive forces within and around the industry, focusing on entry barriers, buyer and supplier power, the threat of substitutes, and other factors contributing to competitive strength. VALUE CHAIN ANALYSIS: The value chain analysis describes all activities that add value to the company's products and services. McCosh et al.

(1998) highlighted the significance of fostering an innovation-friendly culture for successful product development. This necessitates a positive company culture that embraces innovation. The leadership within the organization must support and encourage a culture of novelty, promoting risk-taking behavior. The administration's culture comprises three key elements:

According to Jassawalta and Sashittal (2003), the symbol in the physical environment represents the company's values and influences how people think and behave. They suggest that innovation-supportive cultures form when social interactions create an environment of trust, which becomes embedded in shared beliefs, values, and norms. Businesses that excel in innovation often use a two-handed organizational design. However, when businesses choose to pursue innovation, they typically adopt one of the four organizational designs below:

The construction and direction exercises employed have a significant impact on the performance of innovation. However, it is argued that the two-handed approach is much more successful

than the other three structures mentioned above. According to O'Reilly and Tushman (2004), 90% of two-handed organizations are more likely to achieve their goals, while cross-functional or unsupported teams and only a quarter of functional designs actually result in innovations. Therefore, the two-handed administration design is the optimal one for achieving the best innovation results. O'Reilly and Tushman (2004) state that the reasons why two-handed administration achieves overall greater innovation than other organizational types are as follows: 1) The structure of two-handed administration allows for "cross-fertilization" among units while minimizing cross defects. 2) The tight coordination at the managerial level enables fledging units to share important resources from traditional units such as money, talent, expertise, consumers, etc. 3) Organizational division ensures that the new unit's characteristic methods, structures, and cultures are not being plagued by common business forces. 4) Already established units of the business are protected from the distractions of launching new businesses and innovations, i.e.They can focus on improving their products, operations, and serving customers more efficiently. Diversity is important for promoting innovation and creativity as it brings different perspectives and encourages diverse thinking. Having diverse team members promotes more challenging and unique perspectives, resulting in increased innovation. It is recommended for the company to ensure that employees understand the NPD process and their roles in it. Clear delegation of tasks based on employee skills and talents should be facilitated to encourage motivation. Cooper et al. (2004) recommend providing extensive training and leadership for increased clarity of goals.

The client feedback is focused on improving procedures that help companies listen to their clients and increase client satisfaction. The feedback analyzes and assesses the tangible

and intangible benefits that clients perceive from using a product or service. Understanding how clients use and value a product is crucial for planning future improvements and gaining a competitive advantage. Given the global changes organizations are facing, they will need to undergo strategic reorientations that involve innovation, creativity, and changes in products, services, markets, organizational structure, and human resources. Resistance to change refers to any behavior that demonstrates a person's refusal to support or make a desired change or innovation.

Any opposition to change is often seen by directors as a hurdle that needs to be overcome for successful alteration or innovation. The reasons why people resist change include fear of the unknown, lack of information, fear of losing security, no reason to change, fear of losing power, lack of resources, and bad timing.

There are strategies that a director can use to deal with resistance to change in any form. Effective management of opposition often involves recognizing it early in the change and innovation process. According to Kotter and Schlesinger (1979), common approaches for dealing with resistance to change include understanding the obstacles, education and communication, using appropriate language, retraining, involving and engaging individuals, maintaining an open mind, and providing facilitation and support.

Stress is the outcome of various factors such as emotional, physical, societal, economic, or other factors that require a response or change. In the early 1900s, physicians Robert M. Yerkes and John D.

Dodson and his colleague, research workers from Harvard, discovered that there is a direct relationship between stress and performance and efficiency. They introduced the Yerkes-Dodson law, a well-known bell-shaped curve, which demonstrates that performance increases with increasing stress up until

a certain point; after that point, additional stress only has negative effects on the body. Considering this, it would be wise for the project team to carefully manage the costs associated with the innovation process and thoroughly plan the transformation well in advance of implementation. This way, any potential obstacles can be taken into account and effectively dealt with when they arise.

Decisions and Recommendations

The purpose of this study was to explore the entire internal journey of innovation, from inception to outcome, while also expanding the understanding of practices that facilitate the realization of innovation value.

The main objective is to create a roadmap for achieving superior performance and understanding the actions that contribute to this outcome. This chapter concludes the study and includes recommendations for future research. One key finding is that the innovation processes are simple but require additional steps to minimize risk and enhance effectiveness. The speed at which results are achieved depends on the simplicity of the innovation procedures.

The process of innovation for a business is comprehensive, involving various aspects such as changes in organizational culture, processes, business strategy, and policy. However, there are also factors that can hinder or obstruct this change process. The aim of this study is to gain a thorough understanding of the innovation process and new product development, leading to further research. It is recommended that additional areas warrant further investigation, including:

1. Conducting research on companies that have successfully undergone transformation through the innovation process.
2. Applying the findings of this study to new companies and analyzing

the effects of their transformation compared to the results of this study.