[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/tuhtim/89.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does cognitive distance affect product development for distant target groups? Evidence from the literature using co-citation methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Lew, Jia Hui
  • Marwede, Malte
  • Herstatt, Cornelius
Abstract
The level of cognitive distance determines how detailed objects, persons or events are mentally construed. The higher the level of cognitive distance between two individuals, the lower the level of detail in mental representation of each other. In product development, a detailed conception of the target group is essential for future product success. Product developers need to establish an accurate mental representation of the user and internalize customer preferences to ensure product usability and/or delivery of adequate services in new product development projects (NPD). Depending on the target group in focus, potential users can be distant in various dimensions. Silver Agers (65+ years of age) can be a distant target group for product developers in terms of age and personal contacts as most developers are too young to fall in the category of Silver Agers. Thus, they have likely taken different life experience paths compared to people of their own age cohort. Management and psychological science refers to this phenomenon as cognitive or psychological distance. Especially for distant target groups (e.g. elderly people or children), cognitive distance between product developers and users might have an impact on the creation of new products/services. Literature in this field, especially within an innovation context, is very scarce. Therefore, this paper analyzes existing research streams and thought schools of cognitive distance literature and their applicability in an innovation context to study implications for NPD. We use co-citation analysis to identify and visualize the different research areas dealing with cognitive distance, and to detect conceptual subdomains applicable for individual relationships between product developers and (distant) target groups. We find eight relevant clusters dealing with cognitive distance in psychology and innovation management-related research papers. Construal level theory stands out as the predominant theoretical foundation of cognitive distance in psychological research. It states that distant persons, objects or events in terms of space, time, social or probability are mentally construed in a more abstract way as opposed to nearer/closer/more likely persons, objects or events. Applied to product developers' mental representation of the actual users, this infers that users of distant target groups are likely to be represented more abstractly compared to proximal target groups, e.g. target groups of similar age. This lesser differentiated view on users could lead to non-optimal solutions in NPD. We thus propose that cognitive distance can have an impact on product development. We discover a knowledge gap on the individual level for innovation management studies, i.e. linking cognitive distance to product development success. We analyze findings from psychological research on individual cognitive distances and find that besides temporal distance, the social dimension of cognitive distance appears to be most relevant for empirical tests in innovation management. To empirically explore and test dimensions of social distance, we argue to utilize established network-theoretic measures, like social capital as a proxy for social distance between product developers and distant target groups. We close with practical suggestions to mitigate adverse effects of cognitive distance for product developers.

Suggested Citation

  • Lew, Jia Hui & Marwede, Malte & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2015. "Does cognitive distance affect product development for distant target groups? Evidence from the literature using co-citation methodology," Working Papers 89, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:89
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/111180/1/827506066.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wuyts, Stefan & Colombo, Massimo G. & Dutta, Shantanu & Nooteboom, Bart, 2005. "Empirical tests of optimal cognitive distance," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 277-302, October.
    2. Nooteboom, Bart & Van Haverbeke, Wim & Duysters, Geert & Gilsing, Victor & van den Oord, Ad, 2007. "Optimal cognitive distance and absorptive capacity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 1016-1034, September.
    3. Sirkka L. Jarvenpaa & Dorothy E. Leidner, 1999. "Communication and Trust in Global Virtual Teams," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 10(6), pages 791-815, December.
    4. Abbie Griffin & John R. Hauser, 1993. "The Voice of the Customer," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(1), pages 1-27.
    5. Henry Small, 1973. "Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 24(4), pages 265-269, July.
    6. Gertler, Meric S., 2004. "Manufacturing Culture: The Institutional Geography of Industrial Practice," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198233824.
    7. Maria Di Guardo & Kathryn Harrigan, 2012. "Mapping research on strategic alliances and innovation: a co-citation analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 789-811, December.
    8. Pierre-Alexandre Balland, 2012. "Proximity and the Evolution of Collaboration Networks: Evidence from Research and Development Projects within the Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS) Industry," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(6), pages 741-756, September.
    9. Franz Huber, 2012. "On the Role and Interrelationship of Spatial, Social and Cognitive Proximity: Personal Knowledge Relationships of R&D Workers in the Cambridge Information Technology Cluster," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 46(9), pages 1169-1182, October.
    10. Uwe Cantner & Andreas Meder, 2007. "Technological proximity and the choice of cooperation partner," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 2(1), pages 45-65, June.
    11. Konstantin Wellner & Cornelius Herstatt, 2014. "Determinants Of User Innovator Behaviour In The Silver Market," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(06), pages 1-24.
    12. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco & Malerba, Franco, 2003. "Knowledge-relatedness in firm technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 69-87, January.
    13. Helena Yli‐Renko & Erkko Autio & Harry J. Sapienza, 2001. "Social capital, knowledge acquisition, and knowledge exploitation in young technology‐based firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(6‐7), pages 587-613, June.
    14. Florian Kohlbacher & Cornelius Herstatt (ed.), 2011. "The Silver Market Phenomenon," Springer Books, Springer, edition 2, number 978-3-642-14338-0, April.
    15. Hyysalo, Sampsa, 2009. "Learning for learning economy and social learning," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(5), pages 726-735, June.
    16. Wellner, Konstantin & Herstatt, Cornelius, 2014. "Determinants of user innovator behavior in the silver market," Working Papers 81, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    17. Ina Drejer & Anker Lund Vinding, 2007. "Searching Near and Far: Determinants of Innovative Firms' Propensity to Collaborate Across Geographical Distance," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 259-275.
    18. Florian Kohlbacher & Cornelius Herstatt (ed.), 2008. "The Silver Market Phenomenon," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-75331-5, April.
    19. David Moher & Alessandro Liberati & Jennifer Tetzlaff & Douglas G Altman & The PRISMA Group, 2009. "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-6, July.
    20. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    21. Pamela J. Hinds & Mark Mortensen, 2005. "Understanding Conflict in Geographically Distributed Teams: The Moderating Effects of Shared Identity, Shared Context, and Spontaneous Communication," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 16(3), pages 290-307, June.
    22. Herstatt, Cornelius & Schweisfurth, Tim, 2014. "The intellectual pillars of user innovation: a co-citation analysis," Working Papers 87, Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH), Institute for Technology and Innovation Management.
    23. Rost, Katja, 2011. "The strength of strong ties in the creation of innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(4), pages 588-604, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christian Omobhude & Shih-Hsin Chen, 2019. "The Roles and Measurements of Proximity in Sustained Technology Development: A Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-30, January.
    2. Teis Hansen, 2014. "Juggling with Proximity and Distance: Collaborative Innovation Projects in the Danish Cleantech Industry," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 90(4), pages 375-402, October.
    3. Maria Tsouri, 2022. "Knowledge networks and strong tie creation: the role of relative network position," Journal of Geographical Systems, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 95-114, January.
    4. Yawen Qin & Xiaozhen Qin & Haohui Chen & Xun Li & Wei Lang, 2021. "Measuring cognitive proximity using semantic analysis: A case study of China's ICT industry," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 6059-6084, July.
    5. Abiodun Egbetokun & Ivan Savin, 2015. "Absorptive Capacity and Innovation: When Is It Better to Cooperate?," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & John Foster (ed.), The Evolution of Economic and Innovation Systems, edition 127, pages 373-399, Springer.
    6. Kristina Jespersen & Damiana Rigamonti & Morten Berg Jensen & Rune Bysted, 2018. "Analysis of SMEs partner proximity preferences for process innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(4), pages 879-904, December.
    7. Lorenzo Cassi & Anne Plunket, 2014. "Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 395-422, September.
    8. Ferretti, Marco & Guerini, Massimiliano & Panetti, Eva & Parmentola, Adele, 2022. "The partner next door? The effect of micro-geographical proximity on intra-cluster inter-organizational relationships," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    9. Ron Boschma & Ron Martin, 2010. "The Aims and Scope of Evolutionary Economic Geography," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Rune Dahl Fitjar & Franz Huber & Andrés Rodríguez-Pose, 2016. "Not too close, not too far: testing the Goldilocks principle of ‘optimal’ distance in innovation networks," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(6), pages 465-487, August.
    11. Tom Broekel & Ron Boschma, 2012. "Knowledge networks in the Dutch aviation industry: the proximity paradox," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 409-433, March.
    12. Villani, Elisa & Rasmussen, Einar & Grimaldi, Rosa, 2017. "How intermediary organizations facilitate university–industry technology transfer: A proximity approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 86-102.
    13. Ellen Enkel & Annika Groemminger & Sebastian Heil, 2018. "Managing technological distance in internal and external collaborations: absorptive capacity routines and social integration for innovation," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 43(5), pages 1257-1290, October.
    14. Alexandra Rese & Anke Kutschke & Daniel Baier, 2016. "Analyzing The Relative Influence Of Supply Side, Demand Side And Regulatory Factors On The Success Of Collaborative Energy Innovation Projects," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(02), pages 1-43, February.
    15. Anders Malmberg & Peter Maskell, 2006. "Localized Learning Revisited," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(1), pages 1-18, March.
    16. Buchmann, Tobias & Hain, Daniel & Kudic, Muhamed & Müller, Matthias, 2014. "Exploring the Evolution of Innovation Networks in Science-driven and Scale-intensive Industries: New Evidence from a Stochastic Actor-based Approach," IWH Discussion Papers 1/2014, Halle Institute for Economic Research (IWH).
    17. Grzegorz Micek, 2019. "Geographical Proximity Paradox Revisited: The Case of IT Service SMEs in Poland," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-18, October.
    18. den Hamer, Pieter & Frenken, Koen, 2021. "A network-based model of exploration and exploitation," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 589-599.
    19. Maria Tsouri, 2020. "Knowledge Networks and Strong Tie Creation: the Role of Relative Network Position," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2039, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2020.
    20. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2015. "Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(6), pages 907-920, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    cognitive distance; psychological distance; Silver Market; distant target group; innovation management;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:zbw:tuhtim:89. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ittuhde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.