Study
Innovation & DesignHigh ImpactModerate effect

Knowledge Type Dictates Optimal Proximity for Innovation

The effectiveness of different types of proximity (geographical, cognitive, social, institutional, organizational) in fostering innovation is contingent upon the nature of the knowledge being generated and the stage of new product development.

Regional Studies · 2017

01

Key Findings

  • 01Different forms of proximity (geographical, cognitive, social, institutional, organizational) have varying impacts on innovation.
  • 02The optimal type of proximity depends on the type of knowledge (analytical, synthetic, symbolic) being utilized.
  • 03The intensity of knowledge types shifts across the research, development, and marketing phases of new product development.
02

Application

Design takeaway

Strategically choose collaborators and work environments based on the specific knowledge needed for each stage of the innovation process.

How to apply

When initiating a new design project, map out the primary knowledge types required for each phase (ideation, prototyping, testing, marketing) and assess which proximity dimensions will best facilitate access to and creation of that knowledge.

Project actions

  • 01Consider the different types of knowledge your design project requires (e.g., technical data, creative ideas, market insights).
  • 02Think about how geographical, social, and institutional connections might help or hinder your access to these knowledge types.
03

Method & Evidence

AimTo develop an integrated framework that explains how different forms of proximity influence the innovation process based on the type of knowledge and the stage of new product development.
MethodConceptual framework development supported by a case study.
ProcedureThe paper proposes a framework by distinguishing between analytical, synthetic, and symbolic knowledge, and relating their importance to research, development, and marketing stages. This is illustrated with a case study of Unilever's Becel diet margarine.
ContextInter-organizational innovation and new product development.

Variables

IV["Forms of proximity (geographical, cognitive, social, institutional, organizational)","Type of knowledge (analytical, synthetic, symbolic)","Stage of new product development (research, development, marketing)"]
DVInnovation process effectiveness (e.g., speed, novelty, success rate)
04

Strengths & Limitations

Strengths

  • +Provides a nuanced understanding of innovation drivers beyond simple collaboration.
  • +Offers a structured approach to analyzing the interplay between knowledge, proximity, and development stages.

Limitations

It can be difficult to precisely categorize knowledge types and measure the impact of different proximity dimensions in a real-world design project.

Reliability & validity

The conceptual nature of the framework and reliance on a single case study may limit generalizability and require further empirical testing to establish robust reliability and validity.

Think critically

How might a design team proactively manage and adapt their proximity strategies as a project moves through different development phases and requires different types of knowledge?

05

Design Principles

"Proximity should be tailored to knowledge type and product development phase for optimal innovation."

Understanding how knowledge types interact with proximity dimensions allows design teams to strategically select collaborators and environments that best support specific innovation challenges. This can lead to more efficient and effective product development cycles.

06

What This Means for Your Design

To make new ideas happen, you need to work with the right people in the right places, depending on what kind of information you need and what stage your project is in.

How to use in your project

  • 1.Use this framework to justify your choice of collaborators or research methods, explaining how they align with the knowledge needs of your design project.
07

Add to My Project

08

Quick Cite

(2017). Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process: towards an integrated framework. Regional Studies. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343404.2017.1287349 Retrieved from https://designdex.org/study/06975dff-8ef9-4797-8022-053a6d398147/knowledge-type-dictates-optimal-proximity-for-innovation

Paragraph starter

The research by Davids and Frenken (2017) suggests that the effectiveness of collaborative innovation is significantly influenced by the type of knowledge being generated and the specific stage of new product development. Their work highlights that different forms of proximity—geographical, cognitive, social, institutional, and organizational—play a crucial role, but their relative importance varies. For instance, analytical knowledge might benefit from different proximity arrangements than symbolic knowledge, and these needs evolve from research through to marketing phases. This implies that design teams should strategically select collaborators and work environments based on the knowledge requirements of their specific project stages to optimize innovation outcomes.

09

Source

Regional Studies

Proximity, knowledge base and the innovation process: towards an integrated framework

journal · 2017

View source

Questions about this research

What does the research say about knowledge type dictates optimal proximity for innovation?
Strategically choose collaborators and work environments based on the specific knowledge needed for each stage of the innovation process. Evidence: Regional Studies (2017).
Why does "Knowledge Type Dictates Optimal Proximity for Innovation" matter for design?
Understanding how knowledge types interact with proximity dimensions allows design teams to strategically select collaborators and environments that best support specific innovation challenges. This can lead to more efficient and effective product development cycles.
How can designers apply this research?
Strategically choose collaborators and work environments based on the specific knowledge needed for each stage of the innovation process.
What were the main findings?
Different forms of proximity (geographical, cognitive, social, institutional, organizational) have varying impacts on innovation.. The optimal type of proximity depends on the type of knowledge (analytical, synthetic, symbolic) being utilized.. The intensity of knowledge types shifts across the research, development, and marketing phases of new product development.
What research method was used?
Conceptual framework development supported by a case study..
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence strength is rated Moderate effect, based on a 2017 journal from Regional Studies.
What should I do differently in my next project?
When initiating a new design project, map out the primary knowledge types required for each phase (ideation, prototyping, testing, marketing) and assess which proximity dimensions will best facilitate access to and creation of that knowledge.
What are the limitations?
The framework is conceptual and relies on a single case study for illustration, requiring further empirical validation across diverse industries and innovation types.
Is there evidence that knowledge affects design outcomes?
The study found that the best way to collaborate for innovation depends on what kind of knowledge you're working with and where you are in the product development process. Understanding how knowledge types interact with proximity dimensions allows design teams to strategically select collaborators and environments that Source: Regional Studies (2017).
Where does this innovation research apply?
Inter-organizational innovation and new product development. It sits within innovation & design research on designdex.org.

Related research topics

knowledge design research · evidence on knowledge · does knowledge improve design outcomes · innovation studies for designers · knowledge and innovation findings · innovation & design research evidence