Brand experience is vital for companies to build strong brands and foster favourable consumer outcomes. Although prior research has explored its conceptualisation and consequences, knowledge on how to manage and design brand experience remains limited. We address this gap by providing empirical insights into how brands craft compelling brand experiences, focusing on the visual aspect. Using a multiple-case study, we propose a framework for developing brand experience. It consists of specific challenges and the desired outcomes, along with corresponding creation and coordination practices, contributing to synchronised ideation across a broader range of different types of touchpoints. Lastly, this study offers brand managers and designers guidance to accelerate and structure brand experience design projects.

Laptops in the current economy most often fall short of their potential useful lifetimes, regularly being replaced before their true end-of-life. Increasing laptop lifetimes can play an important role in improving circularity for high-impact ICT equipment. We expand on existing literature about consumer behavior toward laptop lifetimes by examining the role of individuals who use laptops that are instead owned by their company. A total of 20 semi-structured interviews with company-owned laptop users revealed distinct differences in laptop lifetime perspectives when the user is not the owner of the laptop relating to prioritization of performance over circularity, limited feelings of attachment, ownership, and responsibility for company-owned laptops, influences of company culture on circularity, influences of personal habits and perspectives, and limited consideration of circularity without prompts from the employer. Organizations and legislators can use these results to develop tools such as digital product passports that increase organizational circularity for ICT.

Design thinking and artificial intelligence (AI) capabilities are gaining prominence in today’s dynamic markets. However, research gaps remain regarding their influence on the outcomes of new product development (NPD), such as decision-making agility, and the structural conditions facilitating or impeding their effective implementation. Considering design thinking as a dynamic capability and AI capabilities as technology-driven innovation enablers, this study examines their impact on NPD performance via NPD decision-making agility. An empirical investigation using data collected from 230 U.S. firms shows that design thinking and AI capabilities positively influence agility, which in turn drives NPD performance. This study also uncovers that the moderating role of organizational formalization attenuates the impact of design thinking on NPD decision-making agility but strengthens the impact of AI capabilities on NPD decision-making agility. These findings provide NPD managers with insights into using these capabilities to enhance agility and improve NPD performance in the organizational context.

Efficiency-­ led sustainability is important but often fails to deliver absolute reductions in resource use, leaving organisations ex- posed to rebound effects. What remains underexplored is how sufficiency, the strategic limitation of consumption and resource use, is operationalised within organisational contexts. We address this gap through a systematic review of 70 peer-­ reviewed studies, using the Structure-­ Conduct-­ Performance (SCP) framework to connect enabling conditions, organisational practices and sustainability performance. We identify eight thematic clusters reflecting how sufficiency is enacted across domains such as governance and policy, organisational practices, social norms and infrastructural systems. Building on these, we develop a typology of five strategic types through which organisations operationalise sufficiency. This paper (1) adds a system-­ level per- spective that bridges structural, strategic and performance domains; (2) extends the SCP framework as a theory-­ building lens to expose misalignments that hinder sufficiency transitions; and (3) highlights tensions that challenge dominant assumptions in sustainability-­ oriented organisational strategy.

Inspiration is vital for designers. This study builds on findings on inspiration examples for problem-solving tasks and extends those to styling tasks by exploring the influence of examples on styling criteria. The generation of inspiration examples in this study is grounded in design literature and practice. This study identifies primary styling criteria (i.e., personality coherence, visual coherence, and originality) to evaluate the design outcome. The results indicate that designers who received near-field examples that communicated an intended meaning compared to designers who did not receive any examples generated concepts with a higher personality coherence yet with a similar level of originality. Also, near-field visual examples increased visual coherence. Thus, different design criteria need specific examples.

In the 1960s, influential thinkers defined design as a rational problem-solving approach to deal with the challenges of sustainable human development. In 2009, a design consultant and a business academic selected some of these ideas and successfully branded them with the term “design thinking.” As a result, design thinking has developed into a stream of innovation management research discussing how to innovate faster and better in competitive markets. This article aims to foster a reconsideration of the purposes of design thinking moving forward, in view of the sustainable development challenges intertwined with accelerating innovation in a perpetual economic growth paradigm. To this end, we use a problematization method to challenge innovation management research on design thinking. As part of this method, we first systematically collect and critically analyze the articles in this research stream. We uncover a prominent focus on economic impact, while social and environmental impacts remain largely neglected. To overcome this critical limitation, we integrate design thinking with responsible innovation theorizing. We develop a framework for responsible design thinking, explaining how to apply this approach beyond a private interest and competitive advantage logic, to address sustainable development challenges, such as climate change, resource depletion, poverty, and injustice. The framework contributes to strengthening the practical relevance of design thinking and its theoretical foundations. To catalyze this effort, we propose an agenda for future research.

Although the topic of dynamic design capabilities is emerging in the literature and the design community, no research has yet offered an operationalization that considers the strategic integration of DDCs within the organization. This Research Design paper aims to address this gap by defining, conceptualizing, and measuring DDCs through multiple validation studies. Specifically, a scale development procedure grounded on measurement theory will operationalize DDCs through their operational and regenerative dimensions. Drawing on the theory of dynamic capabilities, this paper also presents a conceptual model that will be used to test and validate the newly developed construct of DDCs. This conceptualization explores the influence of DDCs on business model innovation and innovation performance under varying conditions, such as volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity (VUCA).

Circularity-conscious management of information and communications technology (ICT) owned by organizations is important to achieving a circular economy. However, changes in organizational management toward circularity has been met with multiple challenges. This study uses 11 semi-structured interviews with on-the-ground ICT decision-makers in organizations to determine what barriers prevent the development and implementation of circularity-related changes in organizational ICT management. We identified 13 barriers relating to information and knowledge transfer, access to circular equipment, finances and contracts, and prioritization over circularity. Barrier-based interventions were further structured by Lewin's 3-step change management model – unfreeze, change, refreeze – highlighting the role of information access, relationships with contracted partners, and internal accountability and priority structures. These results bridge a currently underdeveloped link between circularity and management research as well as provide policy makers, researchers, and ICT managers insight on facilitating ICT's impactful role in society's transition to circularity.

Business model innovation is increasingly seen as a key competitive factor in B2B settings. In this context, prototyping, experimentation, and piloting have gained prominence as agile and resourceful methods that can be employed in business model innovation pursuits. Yet, despite increasing interest in this area, and the growing number of large B2B companies who also started deploying these methods, there is a lack of clarity on the conceptual boundaries between the three concepts. This may impede the advancement of business model innovation research and practices based on the three concepts. We address this gap by conducting a structured literature review, using cross-reference searches and a key informant interview study of 43 executives in 13 B2B organisations. We offer three contributions: (1) definitions for each of these three concepts, (2) seven dominant similarities and (3) five key differences across them. Our research shows that the concepts serve distinct purposes at different stages of the business model innovation process, and we discuss these findings and their broader implications for the literature on business model innovation and for innovation management practices in B2B companies.

Circular business model experiments may help firms transition towards a circular economy. Little is known about how the participants of experimentation – entrepreneurs, intrapreneurs, innovation managers – develop and test their assumptions during the experimentation process to achieve more circular outcomes. Using a design-science approach, we investigate this process and develop principles to improve it. This is done during three workshops in different contexts: an innovation festival with 14 early-stage circular startups, a workshop with a health technology incumbent, and a workshop with six growth-oriented startups. We find that analyzing their available means – what they find important and prefer to happen (part of their identity), what they know (their skills and knowledge), and whom they know (their social network) – helps to understand how the participants develop and test their assumptions. We show how the mindset and awareness of the participants impact how much attention they pay to the circularity potential of their envisioned circular business models. Based on these insights, we propose a set of principles to prepare the innovation participants for experimentation, and to increase their ability to reflect on their circularity assumptions. Future research is needed to further grow our understanding of the types of principles that can guide meaningful experimentations towards a circular economy.

Over the past few decades, the impact of customer integration on radical new product (RNP) innovation has been extensively investigated. To date, this important topic presents inconsistent empirical findings that must be converged. In this paper, our systematic literature review addresses these inconsistencies by taking a consolidated view of customer integration's effects on the development of RNPs. This extensive review of 153 empirical papers has two main objectives. First, we provide the primary reasons for inconsistent findings by scrutinizing the operationalizations of customer types (i.e., current customers, potential customers, ordinary users, or users with domain-specific skills) and RNPs (i.e., technological innovativeness, or both technological and market innovativeness) used in the studies, as well as the different perspectives on customer integration [i.e., customer-based idea evaluation, participation in direct and indirect idea generation, research and development (R&D) partnerships with customers, having a customer orientation, and disseminating customer knowledge via R&D-marketing collaborations]. Second, we present a synthesized view on factors in the sphere of the innovating company and the customer that influence customer integration's success along three phases of the radical innovation development process (i.e., discovery, incubation, and acceleration). Finally, we present avenues for future research and discuss managerial implications of our synthesized view.

The food processing sector has a considerable environmental impact, due to large volumes of food and packaging waste. Eco-innovations present an important opportunity to reduce this impact. Yet, initial insights suggest that new technologies face considerable challenges to their adoption. The eco-innovation adoption literature has overlooked the food processing sector. The purpose of this paper is to examine the barriers inhibiting the adoption of waste reducing eco-innovations in the food processing sector. We present four detailed case studies of new technologies at different stages of adoption in the UK and Netherlands. The findings reveal ten barriers to the adoption of waste reducing technologies in the food processing sector. The barriers identified include concerns over the influence of technologies on the product's characteristics, its retailing, and a perceived lack of consumer demand. These barriers arise from the powerful influence of retailers within the food supply chain, the influence of technologies on in-store point of sale displays, and the need for distribution trials. We conclude that the adoption of new technologies requires simultaneous acceptance by both food processor and retailers. The paper provides recommendations for policy makers and innovation managers to increase the adoption and diffusion of waste reducing technologies in the food processing sector, as well as implications for future research.

A circular economy maximizes the value of material resources and minimizes greenhouse gas emissions, resource use, waste and pollution. We will posit that circularity needs to be understood as a property of a system (e.g., the mobility system of a city), rather than a property of an individual product or service (e.g., a car or a car-sharing service). Hence, there is a need for more knowledge on how to innovate towards ‘circular ecosystems’. This study proposes a set of principles for ‘circular ecosystem innovation’, based on: 1) a concise literature review to retrieve recommended principles on how to successfully innovate in ecosystems, 2) a mobility case of circular ecosystem innovation to investigate how relevant and useful these principles are for circular oriented innovation. The case data include 20 interviews, workshop data and internal background documents. The identified principles can be categorized in three groups: 1) collaboration (i.e., how firms can interact with other organizations in their ecosystem to innovate towards circularity), 2) experimentation (i.e., how firms can organize a structured trial-and-error process to implement greater circularity) and 3) platformization (i.e., how firms can organize social and economic interactions via online platforms to achieve greater circularity). Future research may focus on identifying opportunities and barriers to applying these principles in different contexts than in the one that is investigated in the present study.

Next to the redesign of industrial products and processes, sustainable business model innovation is a strategic approach to integrate environmental and social concerns into the objectives and operations of organizations. One of the major challenges of this approach is that many promising business model ideas fail to reach the market, which is needed to achieve impact. In the literature, the issue is referred to as a “design-implementation gap.” This paper explores how that critical gap may be bridged. In doing so, we contribute to sustainable business model innovation theory and practice. We contribute to theory by connecting sustainable business model innovation with business experimentation and strategic design, two innovation approaches that leverage prototyping as a way to iteratively implement business ideas early on. Using a design science research methodology, we combine theoretical insights from these three literatures into a tool for setting up small-scale pilots of sustainable business models. We apply, evaluate, and improve our tool through a rigorous process by working with nine startups and one multinational company. As a result, we provide normative theory in terms of the sustainable business model innovation process, explaining that piloting a prototype forces organizations to simultaneously consider the desirability (i.e., what users want), feasibility (i.e., what is technically achievable), viability (i.e., what is financially possible), and sustainability (i.e., what is economically, socially and environmentally acceptable) of a new business model. Doing so early on is functional to bridge the design-implementation gap of sustainable business models. We contribute to practice with the tool itself, which organizations can use to translate sustainable business model ideas defined “on paper” into small-scale pilots as a first implementation step. We encourage future research building on the limitations of this exploratory study by working with a larger sample of companies through longitudinal case studies, to further explain how these pilots can be executed successfully.

The circular economy may help firms to maximize the value of their material resources and minimize the overall resource use, waste, pollution and emissions of their business activities. Implementing a circular economy program requires radical changes in product, business model and ecosystem innovation. Most research on circular oriented innovation takes a product or business model perspective. Few publications have explored how to innovate in ecosystems: how a group of loosely coupled organizations can change how they interact with each other to achieve a collective outcome. This study proposes the Circularity Deck: a card deck-based tool that can help firms to analyze, ideate and develop the circularity potential of their innovation ecosystems. The tool is based on a literature review of circular oriented innovation principles, and of practical examples that show how these principles have been applied. The principles are organized according to the intended circular strategy outcome that they pursue (i.e., narrow, slow, close, regenerate and inform material and energy flows), and the extent of the innovation perspective that is needed to operationalize a principle (i.e., product, business model, or ecosystem innovation). This review and categorization process first produced a novel analysis of the circular economy innovation landscape, using an ecosystem perspective. Second, these results served to develop the Circularity Deck, which was further developed and tested for ease of use and perceived usefulness in 12 workshops with 136 participants from 62 different organizations. The Circularity Deck provides an approach for future research and practice to integrate new principles and examples that can help firms to analyze, ideate and develop circular innovation ecosystems.

How can a firm achieve ambidexterity? The present study proposes that the answer to this question lies in the distinction between ambidextrous culture and ambidextrous innovation. Drawing upon organizational learning theory and the source-position-performance framework, we propose that ambidexterity requires the adoption of two important organizational cultures, willingness to cannibalize (WTCA) and willingness to combine existing knowledge (WTCO), which allow firms to attain superior performance through the implementation of both radical and incremental (i.e., ambidextrous) innovations. Our major contribution lies in addressing the important debate in the literature on whether exploration and exploitation are complements or substitutes. Furthermore, competition intensity is a key condition that determines the degree to which the two types of organizational cultures and the two types of innovations are necessary for superior firm performance. The study uses data from multiple respondents from 199 Chinese firms. Our findings thus suggest that WTCA and WTCO, which are traditionally treated as opposites, are complements in generating radical innovations.

Online platforms have a growing influence on how people interact with the physical world. They organise data streams, economic interactions and social exchanges of their users. Competitive dynamics in this emerging ‘platform society’ revolve around the ability to attract users to a platform, and to collect and analyse data from their interactions to achieve network effects. This chapter is about the roles of online platforms in enabling a more sustainable and circular economy. It identifies and describes three potential roles: they can enable people and organisations to (1) market, (2) operate and (3) co-create products, components and material. The identified roles provide a playground for firms to experiment with online platforms to advance their digital transition towards a circular economy.