{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.014782608695652174, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.430167597765363, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Lessons in Product Innovation: A Case Study of Biotechnology Firms

Firms that are able more quickly than others to add value through product development will be the winners in technology-based industries. This paper examines value-added progress by contrasting four agricultural biotechnology firms that have managed to create value with one that failed to do so. Lessons were induced for new firms struggling to develop products in emerging industries such as biotechnology. The following findings emerged from manager interviews and secondary data. In contrast to the progressive firms, the failed firm neglected to develop a clear product-market focus, complementary skills outside its core technology, and relationships with universities and government. These contrasts seemed to stem from differences in the financing arrangements and the level of organizational politics. The failed firm received a generous one-time funding and had a relatively high level of politics, whereas the funding of the progressive companies was tied to performance milestones and little politicking took place. The reasons for organizational politics are discussed.