Predictors of the Survival of Innovations<sup>*</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the impact of key success factors on the survival of innovations that have reached the market and were developed by inventors outside of established organizations. It is of interest to learn which characteristics predict, at an early stage, the duration of the innovation's length of sales, because this duration is important to the financial success of new products. A focus on survival also can contribute conceptual clarity to the study of new product development. This study uses the Inventor's Assistance Program (IAP) at the Canadian Innovation Centre (CIC) in Waterloo, Canada, as the source of data. The CIC is a not‐for‐profit agency that provides various services to foster business development involving innovative products and services. Analysts in the IAP evaluate a specific product idea or invention on 37 dimensions before it has reached the market. The data for the present study involved these 37 variables evaluated each with a three‐point linguistic scale. As the evaluations of the criteria are subjective, they might be argued to contain inaccuracies compared to objective data. On the other hand, the analysts use multiple related measures of concepts that have been shown to increase predictive accuracy. The use of experts who are unrelated to the projects avoids decision‐making biases potentially associated with project managers' assessment of their own projects, such as unrealistic optimism. The recording of the expert evaluations of the ideas before they reached the market and independent of the measure of success, rather than using post‐project completion evaluations, eliminates measurement biases such as hindsight bias and common method variance bias. Identifying information was used in these records to conduct a telephone survey of the inventors. An exploratory method of data analysis is identified and used that distinguishes research‐appropriate constructs and their indicators in these data. Cluster analysis was performed, and survival regression correlated cluster scores with survival. Three variables were found to significantly affect survival: anticipated stable demand, price required for profitability, and technical product maturity. In addition, the degree of competition had a marginally significant effect. Because these variables can be assessed at an early stage of an inventions' development, the expected survival time for a specific invention may be computed by entering these assessment values into the described survival model. Then this and other information may be used to compute the expected return of an invention.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".