Abstract

This paper summarizes the arguments and counterarguments within the scientific discussion on the issue definition of the structure and degree of novelty of the product in accordance with the classification of novelty in terms of its functional orientation. The main purpose of the research is to develop its own methodology for assessing the degree of novelty of a new product, as a quantitative characteristic, on the basis of comparison with the analogue product. To construct a methodology, it is important to prioritize the scale of the novelty of a product: a regional, national or global market. The determination of the required scale of novelty depends on the choice of the main analogue product and the choice of the consumer group. Systematization literary sources and approaches for solving the problem of determining the level of novelty of goods indicates that there is no universal method for assessing the degree of its novelty. The relevance of the decision of this scientific problem is to assess the degree of novelty of the product because in reality the market is saturated with pseudo-new products. The concept of novelty is relative and does not have clearly defined requirements. Investigation of the topic of quantitative evaluation of the novelty of a product in the paper is carried out in the logical sequence. The essence and structure of novelty are determined, the level of novelty is estimated for each species and as a result, the total integral indicator is derived. Methodological tools of the research methods are mathematical methods of action with matrices and methods for analysing the hierarchies of pairwise comparisons proposed by Thomas L. Saaty. Comparison of indicators according to different criteria is carried out on a nine-point scale. Integral indicator of the level of novelty of a new product is calculated as the average geometric indices of production, market and consumer novelty. Determining the level of novelty of a new product is carried out on a scale from 0 to 1, which allows to determine the novelty, both for each type of novelty and for the general level. An empirical study has been conducted to determine the validity of this method of determining level of novelty of a new product. The results of the research can be useful for the assessment of the enterprises of their new products and as a component of the assessment of the innovation activity of enterprises.

Keywords: novelty, a new product, the types of novelty, the degree of novelty, the structure of novelty.

JEL Classification: L15, О32.

Cite as: Vasutinska, Y., & Kuzminska, N. (2019). Estimating the degree of novelty of a new product: innovative approach. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 2, 282-294. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2019.2-24

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Dutta, S., Lanvin, B., Wunsch-Vincent, S. (2018). Suggested citation: Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO (2018): The Global Innovation Index 2018: Energizing the World with Innovation.Ithaca, Fontainebleau, and Geneva. Retrieved 07.02.2018 from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2018-report
2. Kotler, F. (2007). Marketing Essentials. Moscow: Viliams.
3. Chukhrai, N., Patora, R. (2006). Commodity Innovation Policy: Innovation Management at the Enterprise. Kyiv: Kondor.
4. Hikovata, N. (2006). Managing the process of creating a new product: marketing aspect. Kharkiv: KUZNETS KhNUE.
5. Illiashenko, S. (2007). Commodity Innovation Policy. Sumy: VTD «University book».
6. Nahornyi, Ye. (2009). The level of novelty of the goods as one of the indicators of the expediency of testing new products. Economics: problems of theory and practice, 1053–1064.
7. Nahornyi Ye. (2009). Methodical approaches to assessing the level of novelty of goods. Mechanism of regulation of the economy, 4 (2),48– 58
8. Yuquan, Zh., Hongru, WU. (2017). The effect of R&D novelty and openness decision on firms’ catch-up performance: Empirical evidence from China. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, volume 119. Retrieved 05.02.2018. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/3d03/61b1ffc91c0c3b8d058c76ec0695c1c81ecc.pdf
9. Nieto, M., Santamaría, L., (2005). Novelty of product innovation: the role of different networks. Business Economics Series. Working Paper, 05-65 (16).
10. Scott, R. Livengood(2012)Novelty Discourse.Proceedings of the New Frontiers in Management and Organizational Cognition Conference.Retrieved 28.01.2018 http://mural.maynoothuniversity.ie/4054/1/RS_Novelty.pdf
11. Knell, M., Srholec, M. (2009) The Novelty of Innovation and the Level of Developmen.Inclusive Growth, Innovation and Technological Change: education, social capital and sustainable development.Retrieved 01.02.2018 http://globelics2009dakar.merit.unu.edu/papers/1238518314_MK.pdf
12. Hsieh, W.-L., Ganotakis, P., Kafouros, M., Wang, Ch. (2017) Foreign and Domestic Collaboration, Product InnovationNovelty, and Firm Growth/. The Authors Journal of Product Innovation Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Product Development & Management Association DOI: 10.1111/jpim.12435
13. Sarkar, P., Chakrabarti, A. (2006)Assessing Degree of Novelty of Products to Ascertain Innovative Products. In: International Conference on Product Life Cycle Management PLM06, July 2006, Bangalore. Retrieved 05.02.2019 https://cpdm.iisc.ac.in/cpdm/ideaslab/paper_scans/UID_21.pdf
14. Shcherban, V. (2007). Product creation: marketing, design and technological support. Kyiv: Professional.
15. Iastremska, O., Vereshchahinа, O. (2010). Innovation Management. Kharkiv: INZhEK.
16. Karmazina, O. (2016). Scientific and innovation activity of Ukraine: statistical collection. Kyiv: State Enterprise «Information and Publishing Center of Gosstat of Ukraine».
17. Saaty, T. (1989). Making decisions. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Moscow: Radio and communication.
18. Raikhman, E., Azghaldov, H. (1974). Expert methods in assessing the quality of products of goods. Moscow: Economy.
19. Pliuta, V. (1980). Comparative multivariate analysis in economic research: Taxonomy and factor analysis methods. Moscow: Statistics.
20. Harrington, E. (1965). The Desirability Function. Industrial Quality Control, 4, 494–498.
21. Balabanova, L., Brindina, O. (2006). Marketing commodity policy in the system of enterprise management. Donetsk: DonDUET.
22. Grinev, V. (2004). Product and innovation policy of the enterprise. Kyiv: MAUP.
23. Zavyalov, P. (2002). Marketing in schemes, figures, tables. Moscow: NFRA-M.
24. Pankruhin, A. (2007). Marketing. Moscow: Omega-L.