HONDA'S PREDISPOSITION TOWARDS RADICAL AND DISRUPTIVE INNOVATIONS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractHonda's long term view to R&D does not seem to hamper its ‘nimbleness’ to provide innovative products that are not only new to its historical business markets, but offer significant differentiating product attributes. Honda's recognized innovative prowess in most industries that it focuses upon leads us to ask the following two research questions: 1) What type of innovation approach (e.g. sustaining, radical or disruptive) differentiates Honda as being an innovative firm; and 2) What type of organizational approach supports the type of innovation that Honda generates?A critical hermeneutical analysis of key R&D reports and second-hand interviews related to the HondaJet and Ridgeline product development initiatives followed by a review of past organizational research conducted on Honda as well as certain management literature on innovation generated the following results:Product development programs showed clear patterns of coherency with technologies and design themes developed in preceding product development projects. Certain pertinent analogies were induced by these ‘coherent innovation’ patterns: namely, ‘living’ mythologies and societies, ‘healthy doubt’ or ambivalence in regards to retained knowledge, and creative routines. These analogies are a first indication of dialectics, whether as co-existence or synthesis of contradictions. A further examination of the management literature on Honda clearly indicates Honda's dialectical approach within the organization. Our own cross reference to technical reports and second-hand verbatim in relation to both the HondaJet and the Honda Ridgeline product development programs, as well as to their respective precursor development programs, revealed that the organizational approach can best be described as a dialectical holographic metaphor. There is also a clear relationship between Honda's dialectical holograph, especially in regards to knowledge creation as seen across the HondaJet and Honda Ridgeline development programs, and a general predisposition towards producing radical and disruptive innovations. A conceptual framework is proposed with the aim of providing further insights as to how an organization can achieve the dialectic holographic metaphor; and in turn, a general predisposition towards generating either radical or disruptive innovations.Conclusions:1) Both the HondaJet and the Honda Ridgeline are viewed as being both radical and disruptive innovations. Furthermore, both product development programs showed clear patterns of coherency with technologies and design themes developed in preceding product development projects (hence, ‘coherent innovation’). Hence, Honda's resulting innovations are simultaneously characterized by both continuity and novelty.2) Honda's organizational approach in support of this type of innovation can best be described as a dialectical holographic metaphor.3) Honda's approach is also in marked contrast to certain established literature as to how to attain disruptive innovations.
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 | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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".