INOTEX WORKSHOP Isfahan Science & Technology Town

Marketing of Research Results Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of High-Tech Innovation and Technology Marketing Institute for Marketing Management, Vienna University of Economics and Business Isfahan, May 26th, 2016

2

Hon. Prof. Dr. Rainer Hasenauer WU-Graduate, postdoctoral lectureship in technology marketing and high tech marketing, honorary professor, founder, entrepreneur, business angel, focus: B2B Marketing for High Tech Markets http://www.wu.ac.at/mm/team/hasenauer www.hitechcentrum.eu www.hitec.at

How to market innovative research results?

Agenda 9:00 A1: Market, Knowledge Markets, Innovation 9:45 A2: Knowledge Markets, Conditions of Marketability 10.30 Break 10:50 A3: Technology & Market Readiness, Acceptance/ Rejection, Willingness to Pay 11:35 A4: Open Discussion with examples of the audience 12:00 am to 1 pm Lunch Break 13:00 A5: Window of Opportunity, Marketing Decisions 14:30 A6: Business Model, Triple Base Line, Market Percolation, 15:30 A7: Discussion using examples of the audience 16:00 A8: Concluding Remarks

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

3

Time am/pm

Slide start

Chapter

content

9:00

5

A1

Market, Knowledge Markets, Innovation

9:45

18

A2

Knowledge Markets, Conditions of Marketability

10:30

Break

10:50

54

A3

Technology & Market Readiness, Technology Acceptance/ Rejection, Willingness to Pay

11:35

79

A4

Open Discussion with examples of the audience

12:00

Lunch Break

13:00

83

A5

Window of Opportunity, Marketing Decisions

14:30

92

A6

Business Model, Triple Base Line, Market Percolation,

15:30

127

A7

Discussion using examples of the audience

A8

Concluding Remarks

16:00

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

4

A1: Market, Knowledge Markets, Innovation 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

Supply and Demand, Knowledge Markets, Innovation, Transformation of nescience into knowledge, Marketability of research results Marketability of knowledge Absorption capacity

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5

A1: Market, Knowledge Markets, Innovation 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

Supply and Demand, Knowledge Markets, Innovation Transformation of nescience into knowledge, Marketability of research results Marketability of knowledge Absorption capacity

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

6

Behind each bottleneck exists a new market potential adapting demand

Societal trends bottleneck Market

Public subsidies for R&D to overcome bottlenecks

bottleneck

Technological trends

adapting supply

Demand for innovation to overcome bottlenecks

Basic & applied research & development

7

1) Supply and Demand of Research Results

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

A1: Market, Knowledge Markets, Innovation 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

Supply and Demand, Knowledge Markets, Innovation Transformation of nescience into knowledge, Marketability of research results Marketability of knowledge Absorption capacity

8

5/26/2016

2) Knowledge Markets (1) 9

Latent



Emergent 

Real SUPPLY

MARKET



DEMAND 

Real Emergent Latent



Markets are interfacing supply and demand Knowledge markets are interfacing research supply with solution demand Behind each bottleneck (=problem) exists a new market potential Knowledge markets transform inventions into innovation Innovation is economical and societal successful invention

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

2) Knowledge Markets (2) Market Covergence

Wishful thinking

latent demand

Latent supply

emergent demand real demand convergence real supply emergent supply

Real markets are the result of societal and R&D driving forces, transforming latent demand via emergent into real market demand

Research results past

10

today

future

from latent demand via emergent to real demand „Markets are conversations“ (cluetrain) manifest 1999 Research capability as adjunctive service for society

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Time arrow

2) Knowledge Market (3) Product innovation examples of our Marketing Courses 11

ContainMe

abotic

tunesbag

ayControl

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

2) Knowledge Markets (4) Technologies innovation examples of our Marketing Courses 12

 

    

   

Bionic surface technologies Cellular functional material for automotive applications 2D laser scanner for safety & security systems Diamond like carbons Printed foil sensors for MMI Phase change materials Synthetic cell membranes on polymer basis Humidity sensor Cloud computing services Bendable Li-battery Wireless strain gauge

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasena uer Marketi ng of Resear ch Results

A1: Market, Knowledge Markets, Innovation 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

Supply and Demand, Knowledge Markets, Innovation Transformation of nescience into knowledge, Marketability of research results Marketability of knowledge Absorption capacity

5/26/2016

13

14 Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

15

Innovation As the basis for long-term success. Based on research results.

Definition 16



„By innovation I mean something quite different from invention. To me, innovation means invention implemented and taken to market. And beyond innovation lies disruptive innovation, which actually changes social practices – the way we live, work, and learn.“ (Chesbrough, Open Innovation, 2003) (Henry William Chesbrough: Harvard Business School; Open Innovation Center at University of California, Berkeley.)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Pitfalls of innovative behavior 17

Below are the five major pitfalls people and organizations tend to fall into when trying to become more innovative. As you read, see how many of these apply to you or your organization:

1. 2. 3. 4.

Identifying the wrong problem. Judging ideas too quickly. Stopping with the first good idea (never the best). Failing to "Get the bandits on the train" (getting support from those who could derail your train) 5. Obeying rules that don't exist. Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

A2: Knowledge Markets, Conditions of Marketability

Rainer Hasena uer Marketi ng of Resear ch Results

1) Knowledge markets in B2B 2) Market segmentation, segmentation dynamics 3) Supply & Demand of research results 4) Marketability

5/26/2016

18

Comparative competitive Advantage Customer’s need for problem solving research results

USP/IHL TTM/ ROI

Supplier’s research capacity

Competitor’s research capacity

IHL = Innovation Half Life, TTM = Time to Market, ROI = Return on Investment USP = Unique Selling Proposition Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

19

5/26/2016

Market Segmentation (1) 20







Dividing and editing a broad target market into subsets of groups of consumers (b2c) or companies (b2b) who have common needs and similar user behavior Market segments should react almost similar to marketing instruments and company behavior. Therefore companies can focus their activities differentiated.

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Market segmentation (2) - Goals 21





 





to identify target markets (niche markets) which are homogenous within the segment and different between the market segments to design and implement strategies to target their needs and desires using media channels and other touch-points that best allow to reach them to gather competitive advantages to get an overview of the market and identify the competitive advantage of owns company to better position new products or reposition existing products. Effective use of the marketing-mix

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Market segmentation (3) - Criteria 22



  





Homogenous within the segment and heterogeneous between the market segments Possible to measure. Large enough to earn profit. (see next slide) Stable enough that it does not vanish after some time. Possible to reach potential customers via the organization's promotion and distribution channel. Responds consistently to a given market stimulus.

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Market segmentation (4) – Selective Selling & KPI‘s 23



Relation between market segmentation and distribution cost accounting



Sales per segment Contribution Margin CM per segment Segment average productivity: sales [MU]/sales cost [MU] Segment gross profitability: CM [MU]/ sales cost [MU] Marginal segment profitability: ∆ CM [MU] / ∆ sales cost [MU]

 





∆ = difference between two consecutive periods Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Target groups: Criteria for describing your B2C target group* 24

Target markets are groups of individuals that are separated by distinguishable and noticeable aspects.  geographic segmentations, addresses (their location climate region)  Demographic / socioeconomic segmentation (gender, age, income, occupation, education, household size, and stage in the family life cycle)  psychographic segmentation (similar attitudes, values, and lifestyles)  behavioral segmentation (occasions, degree of loyalty, price sensitivity, usage intensity)  product-related segmentation (relationship to a product) *Cohen 2005

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Target groups: Criteria for describing your B2C target group* 25

Target markets are groups of individuals that are separated by distinguishable and noticeable aspects.  geographic segmentations, addresses (their location, climate, region)  Demographic / socioeconomic segmentation (gender, age, income, occupation, education, household size, and stage in the family life cycle)  psychographic segmentation (similar attitudes, values, and lifestyles)  behavioral segmentation (occasions, degree of loyalty, price sensitivity, usage intensity)  product-related segmentation (relationship to a product) *Cohen 2005

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Examples for B2C segmentation 26

geographic – local urban markets, cities > 1.5 million inhabitants demographic/socioeconomic – possible segmentation: female, early adopters, 18-30 years, high education level, single psychographic – environmental friendly users, young families, sustainability is important behavioral – usage instead of ownership, low price sensitivity, regular usage product-related – no specific segmentation Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Examples for B2C segmentation 27

geographic – local urban markets, cities, industry-driven demographic/socioeconomic – possible segmentation: male, innovators, high income, 30-40 years psychographic – prestige, innovator, rich behavioral – ownership is very important product-related – no specific segmentation

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Target Groups: Criteria for describing your B2B target group* 28









Organizational criteria (size of company, location of company, market share, etc.) Economic criteria (finance, assets, efficiency, growth, IPR-intensity, etc.) Buying behavior of companies (buying center, supplier changes, date of purchase [lead user, innovator, early adopter, early majority, late majority, laggards] Characteristics of management of companies (How do they look for information? Do they have time pressure? Are they innovators? etc.)

*Backhaus 2009 Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Examples for B2B segmentation 29



Organizational criteria – bottling plant for juice (small factory in Austria, no existing infrastructure to fill-in their own juice into bottles)



Economic criteria (ongoing growth of the factory, for about 5 years) Buying behavior of companies (innovative managing director, small decision-taking groups, no existing contracts with competitors) Characteristics of management of companies (Usage of web 2.0 instruments for their business)





Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Examples for B2B segmentation 30

Abotic Assistent James - Fast and easy opening doors automatically 







Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

Organizational criteria: (health care facilities in Austria) Economic criteria: (number of potential installations) Buying behavior of companies (innovative managing director, independent decisionprocesses) Characteristics of management of companies (Innovators) 5/26/2016

Market Positioning / USP 31







Positioning = identifying and attempting to occupy a market niche for a brand, product or service utilizing traditional marketing placement strategies (i.e. price, promotion, distribution, packaging, and competition). Develop your USP (unique selling proposition) to easily and clearly be differentiated from competitors and your customers are able to immediately recognize the value of your product/service (competitive advantage) Positioning is part of the business strategy (blue ocean strategy – red ocean strategy)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Dynamics of Market Segmentation 32

Societal and Research & Development impacts Change of existing segments

Need of adaptation

Change of segment size expansion / shrinkage

Change of needs

Segment formation Segment evaluation and selection Segment processing

inter market migration inter-Segment-migration And/or

Change of segment profile Change of intensities Change of weight attributes

New Formation/ dissolution of segment 1. inter-Market-migration 2. inter-Segment-migration

Disruptive Technology Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Segment Migration 33

Dimension 2

Segment A

t1 t2

Segment C Segment B

Dimension 1 Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Market Segment Trend 34

Dimension 2

Segment A Segment C

t1 t2 Segment B

Trend

Dimension 1 Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Change in the nature of segment basis 35

t1 Dimension 2

t2 Segment

A

t1

Segment

C

t2

*e.g. IoT

Segment

B Dimension 1

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Innovation? controllable?

testable?

compatible?

implementable?

correctable? Industry Standards

Integration? Acceptance?

*) BC = Buying Center

36

Assimilation? User / BC* targets

Marketability of Research Results What are the characteristics of technical innovations? How is user‘s reaction onto a technical / technological innovation? Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Product vs. High Tech Marketing I 37

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Product vs. High Tech Marketing II 38

Marketing of Research Results is equivalent with high tech marketing Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Technology Marketing- / High-Tech marketing 39

Technology Marketing  How to market innovative technologies? (e.g. bionic surfaces, cellular functional materials (e.g. Diamond Like Carbon), Time Triggered Technology, VR-Prototyping, SLG for 3D Printing, basalt fibers, mobile augmented reality, etc.) High Tech Marketing  How to market innovative high tech products / services e.g. Sunnybag , OLP software for robots, TTP, V-Redox-electrical storage, PV: CdTe-cell?, Thermic-Sensors, Phase change material,… Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Behind each bottleneck exists a new market potential adapting demand

Societal trends bottleneck Market

Public subsidies for R&D to overcome bottlenecks

bottleneck

Technological trends

adapting supply

Demand for innovation to overcome bottlenecks

Basic & applied research & development

40

Societal and economic viewpoint

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

High Tech Innovation: market entry 41







Markets are formed by the convergence of supply and demand Behind each bottleneck exists a new market potential, sometimes also innovation potential Economically successful interfacing of knowledge supply and demand requires fulfillment of Marketability Criteria and Technology Acceptance Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Marketing of Market High-Technology uncertainty Products and Innovations

Technology uncertainty

M

Market readiness level

42

competitive volatility

Technology readiness level

Conditions for market entry

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Market Covergence

Wishful thinking

latent demand

emergent demand real demand convergence real supply

Latent supply

emergent supply

Real markets are the result of societal and R&D driving forces, transforming latent demand via emergent into real market demand

Research results past

43

today

future

from latent demand to real demand „Markets are conversations“ (clue train manifest 1999) Research capability as adjunctive service

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Time arro

High Tech Markets 44

Features:  Nearness to basic and/or applied research  Innovative => high profit / high risk business  Dynamic => high speed of market behavior  Fragmented => numerous small windows of opportunity, hard to score  Shorter product life cycles, but  Longer lasting technology life cycles  Long lasting skill life cycles  Multidisciplinary communication content Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

remote from market Phase 0 research

near to market

Phase 1 solution

Phase 2 prototype

Phase 3 Pre commercial Product

Phase 4 Market entry

„Innovation: no man‘s land“ ?

Research Push*)

MTB1)

Market Pull

„Distance of understanding“

„Innovator‘s Ear“

45

Markets are conversations

„Customer‘s voice“

Missing Link in Innovation ( Nokia 2005)

1) MTB = Marketing TestBed 2) *) also „Technology Push“ Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Technology Push/Market Entry Projects (20132014) ID A B C D E F G H I J K L M

Innovation Gesture controlled mmi Technical simulation Atmospheric nitrogen deposition collector Aerosol jet-printing Selective Laser Melting Sensors for mobile robots Health CCPM Safety Robot Atmospheric plasma for wood surface energy Phase change material Flame retardant rubber Magic lens augmented reality Bone diagnostics

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

Entry 2014 2014 2014

Industry scanner software sensor

2014 2014 2014 2013 2013 2013

3d printing 3d printing sensor robotics robotics material science

2013 2013 2013 2013

building construction material science software medical diagnosis 46 5/26/2016

Technology Push/Market Entry Projects (2011-2012) ID N O P R S T U V W X Y Z

Innovation Continuous Non-Invasive Blood-Pressure Measurement ‘Watch dog’ for semiconductor Containment Lab on chip diagnostics Vibrational acoustic analysis Smart bottling plant Bright red systems mmi pressure and temperature sensors Bionic surface Cellular materials V-REDOX Diamond-like carbon

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

Entry 2012

Industry medical diagnosis

2012 2012 2012 2012 2011 2011 2011

software building construction software medical diagnosis machine construction scanner sensor

2011 2011 2011 2011

material science material science energy storage material science 5/26/2016 47

Readiness of 26 Technology Push Projects Demand Level

4

Identification of specific need

2

Occurence of feeling “something is missing”

1

5/26/2016

T

O;

M;T;

P;

Z;

A;

F;V;

R;

N;

E;

X;

C;

G;

D;

Technology Level

1

2

3

4 Laboratory Demon-stration

C;F;W I;K;W;X;Z M;N;S A;U G;H D;E J;P Q;Y

J;K;

I;

Research to prove feasilibility

Sensor: Material med. diagnosis Scanner Robotics 3D print building constr. wearables, location services machine

B;L;O;R

S;

3

Applied Research

Industry Software

W;

B;

5

6

7

Y;

Market Risk 8

9 Market / Sales Certification

Quantification of expected functionalities Identification of the expected functionalities for new product/service

6

Q;U;

Product Industrial-isation

5

7

H;

Industrial Prototype

Identification of system capabilities

Technology Risk

8

L;

whole system Field demonstration

9

Technology Development

Building the adapted answer to the expressed need in the market Identification of the Experts possessing the competencies Definition of the necessary and sufficient competencies and resources Translation of the expected functionalities into needed capabilities to build the response

Fundamental research

Market Readiness

Red-not ready for market TRL / MRL Yellow – Transition: COHERENCE Green—Ready for market Off diagonal = risk Technology management = stay on diagonal Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

48

Market Readiness Level (MRL)

Lessons Learned #1: Stay on the Diagonal! 10

8



They will come, but we won’t make it!

We will make it, and they will come!

6

4

2 2

4

6

We will make it, but they won’t come! 8

Concurrent, step-by-step market and technology development places the right product into the right market window at the right time.

Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results49

Questions to the innovator: „Is the innovation…….?“ controllable?

Voice of the Customer

Innovative?

testable?

compatible? implementable?

correctable? industrial standards

integrable?

acceptable?

Assimilation gap

Goals of the customer/user

Willingness to pay

50

assimilative?

Implications of high tech innovations Marketability criteria

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Criteria of High-Tech Innovation Marketability (C 1.)

Innovativeness Technology Acceptance:

(C 2.)

Testability

(C 3.)

Controllability

Perceived Usefulness

(C 4.)

Compatibility

Perceived Ease of Use

(C 5.)

Implementability

(C 6.)

Assimilability

+ Willingness to Pay

_

Technology Rejection

• Cross-functionality is a proven economic success factor in high-tech innovation and implies communication between multiple knowledge disciplines • The buying / selling center is represented by a multidisciplinary buying / selling team Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

51

Marketability criteria of high tech innovation C1: Innovativeness: “ is the subjective degree of newness of a product, ranging from gradual over incremental to radical innovative.” C2:Testability: “ is the ability of the innovation to be tested with reproducible result. Testability requires observability.” C3: Controllability: “is the ability of the innovation to stabilize the system against external/internal errors or perturbations by using feedback loops” C4: Compatibility: “is the ability of the innovation to mutually interface and operate reliably with non-innovative systems.” C5: Implementability: “is the ability of the innovation to be properly built in, set up and run in an existing operating system.” C6: Assimilability: “Assimilability is the ability of the innovation to accommodate / assimilate to the system men-machine-organization where the innovation is used.”

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

52

A3: Technology Acceptance, Assimilation Gap Technology Marketing, Willingness to Pay 1) 2) 3) 4)

Technology readiness – Market readiness Technology Acceptance - Assimilation Gap Willingness to Pay Technology Marketing / KPI’s a. Time To Market b. Innovation Half Life c. ROI / ROS

53

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

A3: Technology Acceptance, Assimilation Gap Technology Marketing, Willingness to Pay 1) 2) 3) 4)

Technology readiness – Market readiness Technology Acceptance - Assimilation Gap Willingness to Pay Technology Marketing / KPI’s a. Time To Market b. Innovation Half Life c. ROI / ROS

54

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

The Economics of Innovation: Market Pull versus Technology Push 55

Market Pull

Technology Push

Technology

Product

Black Box

Black Box

Market Progress, Time “Listen to your customers!” ~70% of studies Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

“If we make it, they will come!” ~30% of studies 5/26/2016

Market Readiness Level (MRL)

Key Questions

10

8

Sweet Spot

Technology Push

6

4

Demand Pull

2 2

4

6

8

10

Technology Readiness Level (TRL)

• Is the market ready for the technology? • Is the technology ready for the market? 5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

56

A3: Technology Acceptance, Assimilation Gap Technology Marketing, Willingness to Pay 1) 2) 3) 4)

Technology readiness – Market readiness Technology Acceptance - Assimilation Gap Willingness to Pay Technology Marketing / KPI’s a. Time To Market b. Innovation Half Life c. ROI / ROS

5/26/2016

57

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

Research problem 58

• The innovation process is only a success when the innovation is used appropriately by its intended users • Innovations cannot improve organizational performance if they are not used • Technological progress fundamentally depends on the adoption of innovations • Simply acquiring an innovation is not sufficient from a supplier’s perspective 

Is the innovation going to be successful in a market?  Will it be bought by the target group? (=Adoption)  Will it be used by the target group? (= Acceptance)  Is there a Gap between adoption and acceptance (=Assimilation)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Technology Acceptance 59

Technology or user acceptance is defined as the degree to which individual users will use a given system when usage is voluntary or discretionary. The acceptance of a product or service refers to the continued usage of it. It can be measure by two parameter values: frequency of use and intensity of use. (Morris, 1996) Technology Acceptance is important for:  Prediction of actual system use (seller perspective)  Prediction of actual system use (buyer perspective)  System (re-) design Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Technology Acceptance Model I (TAM) – Davis, 1989 

Adaption of Theory of Reasoned Action (TRA) and Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB) tailored for information systems



Goal: explanation and prediction of computer acceptance (=usage)



Two basic determinants: -

Perceived usefulness (PU) Perceived ease of use (EOU)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

60

TAM - Definitions 

Perceived Usefulness (PU) is defined as the prospective user‘s subjective probability that using a specific application system will increase his or her job performance within an organizational context.



Perceived Ease of Use (PEoU) refers to the degree to which the prospective user expects the target system to be free of effort.

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

61

Definitions 62

Attitudes towards behaviour refer to the degree to which a person has a favourable or unfavourable evaluation or appraisal of the behaviour in question (Ajzen 1991) Intention towards adopting refers to the degree to which a person has a favourable or unfavourable purpose of adopting or rejecting a product or service. Adoption is considered a dichotomous phenomenon. It refers to the decision of any individual or organization to make use of an innovation. ‘Diffusion’ is defined as the process of dispersion of innovative products in social systems (Nieschlag, Dichtl et al. 1997). ‘Diffusion refers to the accumulated level of users of an innovation in a market’ (Rogers 1995). Technology acceptance is defined as the degree to which individual users will use a given system when usage is voluntary or discretionary. (Morris 1996) The acceptance of a product or service refers to the continued usage of it. It can be measure two parameter values: 1) frequency of use and 2) intensity of use. Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

TAM – Structural Equation Model (Davis, 1989) Perceived Usefulness

Perceived Usefulness PU

External variables

Attitude

Behavioral intention

Use Test

Quality of Use

Perceived Ease of Use

Perceived Ease of Use PEoU

actual period

63

next period

Technology Acceptance Model

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT, Venkatesh et. al. 2003)

Perceived Ease of Use Perceived Usefulness

Behavioral Intention

Social Influence

User Behavior (Acceptance)

Facilitating Conditions

Gender

64

Age

Experience

Voluntariness of Use

Unified Theory of Acceptance & Use of Technology

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Inside-Out knowledge flow externalize IPR‘s and knowledge

MTB

Company innovation Outside-In knowledge flow Lead user academic units R&D units

Fig. : [10, Füller et al.p.4] Multistage CBI Process with online Community

65

Community Based Innovation (CBI)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Social Percolation field

Influencer Positive WOM

Influencer Negative WOM

Cross industry Scouts

External variables

Verifiers

Perceived Usefulness

Perceived Usefulness

Attitude

Behavioral intention

Use Test

Perceived Ease of Use

Perceived Ease of Use

actual period

WOM: word of mouth

66

Quality of Use

next period Social percolation / antipercolation field

Microstructure of CBI for Cross Industry Technology Acceptance Testbed in B2B marketing Research results applicable in multi-industry environments require a cross industry technology acceptance evaluation Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

The Assimilation Gap 67

Fichman and Kemerer (1999) define an assimilation gap as ‘the difference between the pattern of cumulative acquisitions and cumulative deployments of an innovation across a population of potential adopters.’

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

100%

Cumulative Adoption

Acquisition Assimilation Gap

Actual Use

Time

68

Acceptance: The assimilation gap Examples Discussion

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Cumulative TETRA Networks

40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 2002

2003

2004

Time Acquisition

69

Deployment

Example of Assimilation Gap (TETRA systems: Hainbuchner, 2005)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

A3: Technology Acceptance, Assimilation Gap Technology Marketing, Willingness to Pay Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

1) 2) 3) 4)

Technology readiness – Market readiness Technology Acceptance - Assimilation Gap Willingness to Pay Technology Marketing / KPI’s a. Time To Market b. Innovation Half Life c. ROI / ROS 70

5/26/2016

1. Willingness to Pay/ Determine the Price! (WTP) 71



WTP is the maximum amount of money which a legal or physical person is willing to pay a) For acquiring an expected benefit by buying a product / service or b) For avoiding an expected risk of damage or deterioration.

Opportunity cost and opportunity yield consideration: Ad a): cost of a lost opportunity to make a profit. Ad b): yield of a realized opportunity to avoid cost / loss

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

1.1. WtP and TAM - Definitions 72



Perceived usefulness is defined as the prospective user‘s subjective probability that using a specific application system will increase his or her job performance within an organizational context.



Perceived ease of use refers to the degree to which the prospective user expects the target system to be free of effort.



TAM Technology Acceptance Monitor

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

72

Willingness To Pay : price band 73

PRICE User Based Pricing Willingness

Cost Based Pricing (lower bound)

Pay (Amount) R&D

Technical Fit

Competitive Pricing

Production Material

COM

NAV

Direct benefit (Risk, Time) Example for Pricing of location based services

COM NAV (≤100%) (=100%)

Example: location based satellite services Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

A3: Technology Acceptance, Assimilation Gap Technology Marketing, Willingness to Pay Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

1) 2) 3) 4)

Technology readiness – Market readiness Technology Acceptance - Assimilation Gap Willingness to Pay Technology Marketing / KPI’s a. Time To Market b. Innovation Half Life c. ROI / ROS 74

5/26/2016

Marketing Management task of high tech start ups can be described by:

Time to Market ? Increase speed! Decision Space Knowledge Markets

Chakravarthy, 1997

Decision

innovation half life ?*) Extend innovation lead! *) Innovation half life = temporal stability of innovation lead compared with the best competitor known to the innovator.

75

Marketing for high tech products

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Perceived innovation lead relative to the best competitor

How long does it take until 50% of the innovator‘s innovation lead is caught up by the best competitor – known to the innovator?

100%

Innovation A,B,C A

B

C

50% limit

Position of best competitor

76

Research !

1x

3x

time

7x

Competitive Innovation Half Life (C-IHL) Applied to: Vanadium Redox Flow-batteries, Chemical Vapor Deposition, Plasma assisted CVD, mobile augmented reality etc. Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Stressors / KPI‘s in High Tech Marketing Management 77

„Time to Market“ Stress: (Break Even TTM) „Solution Stress“: (C-IHL)

required time for BE available time for BE

>1

R&D Time for required innovation lead > 1 R&D Time for achievable innovation lead

„Profitability Stress“: (EBIT)

required EBIT achievable EBIT

>1

If > 1, then stress caused by shortage of resources. Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

A4: Open Discussion with Examples of the Audience Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

1) How to market innovative research results? 2) Technology Push / Demand Pull 3) Self estimation of TRL / MRL position

78

5/26/2016

1

2

3

4

9 8 7 6 5 4

1 0 Technology Level

6

7

8

9 Market / Sales Certification

Occurence of feeling “something is missing”

Product Industrialisation

2

Industrial Prototype

Identification of specific need

whole system Field demonstration

3

5 Technology Development

Quantification of expected functionalities Identification of the expected functionalities for new product/service

9

Laboratory Demon-stration

Definition of the necessary and sufficient competencies and resources Translation of the expected functionalities into needed capabilities to build the response Identification of system capabilities

1

WORKING SHEET "TRL-MRL COHERENCE OF INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGY" 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Research to prove feasilibility

Building the adapted answer to the expressed need in the market Identification of the Experts possessing the competencies

Demand Level

Applied Research

Demand Readiness

Fundamental research

EXERCISE / DISCUSSION: RATING OF TRL AND MRL

Technology Readiness

79

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Case: Technology Readiness Level applied to marketability How ready is your research result to cope with marketability criteria? 80

BUYING CENTER ROLES AND FUNCTIONS

Case: Decider

influencer

expert

user

MARKTABILITY CRITERIA

Technology acceptance

Perceived Usefulness Perceived Ease of Use Willingness To Pay Innovativeness Testability Controllability Compatibility Implementability

RainerAssimilability Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

buyer

Recent Projects by HiTec 81

Technology acceptance, Willingness to Pay and Marketing Mix for:  electric energy storage, sensors, functional materials, real time software, robotic systems, satellite services, mobile augmented reality and their related start up companies Interdisciplinary research in:  Multi-objective programming for eco-technical systems  Research on latent & emergent technology markets for location based services and value added services in context with satellite navigation.  Technological compliance in robotic physiotherapy and emergency medicine (SCA) 1) MMI 2)  Applied Measuring Innovation lead and Innovation half life  R&D of Marketing Test Bed for high tech innovative products & service 

1) SCA : Sudden Cardiac Arrest 2) MMI Man Machine Interface 5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

Marketing Test Beds

Research !

82

Marketing testbed for market entry of High Tech Start Up‘s (1) Marketing Testbed is an experimental approach, currently under development, focused on exploration and testing of marketing mix provisions under realistic market conditions. Differentiation to technical Testbeds: Focus on Marketing Mix, Technology-/Product acceptance Willingness to Pay per market segment  example: Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

A5: Window of Opportunity, Marketing Decisions, Marketing Testbed for Market Entry Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

1) Window of Opportunity 2) Experience Report on Marketing of Research Results 3) Structure of 4 P’s Marketing Mix

83

5/26/2016

New Technology

market readiness

State of Art Technology

Minimum Readiness Market

Research !

WoO MTB

Minimum Readiness MTB Time for market entry

market resistance

84

WoO : Window of Opportunity / (G. Day / J. Freeman) MTB : Marketing TestBed

Market Entry & Window of Opportunity (WoO) (4 of 5) Technology readiness level, Societal readiness level, market readiness level, innovation readiness level. Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Marketing Testbed for market entry of high tech innovation start up‘s (1 of 5) 85



  

European Territorial Cooperation (ETC)-Project (AustriaSlovakia)N00092 „cross border Hi-Tech Center“ Partner: TU Wien, EU BA, WU Wien, INITS Incubator 3 years collaborative research and teaching Marketing-Testbeds for  Phase change material  Medical care robot for post surgery rehabilitation  Peril detection and counter fighting robot  Plasma assisted surface activation under atmospheric condition for functional material and wood

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Marketing Testbed for Market Entry of Innovative High Tech Products for Start Up‘s (2 of 5) 86

Experimental approach in B2B innovation marketing  Differentiated into:

Innovation nearness to market: (functional) prototype stage  Segmentation criteria e.g. technological affinity, strain of bottle neck („economic strain due to lost opportunity to increase productivity / profitability“)  Type of scale: qualitative vs. quantitative market research  Segment focused instance of marketing mix (4P‘s) 



Integration of:

Community Based Innovation (CBI) and Open Innovation (OI)  Technology acceptance: perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEoU) 

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Marketability Criteria: Technology State of Art vs. Innovative Technology • controllability? • perceived usefulness • perceived ease of use

testbeds for market entries

Acceptance of market segment • compatibility with industrial standards? • removed bottle neck strain / benefit expectation? • technological compatibility? • societal compatibility? • environmental compatibility?

87

*) George S.Day

Market Entry & Window of Opportunity

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Promotion

Product

Price

Marketing Mix Model

Place

Marketing Mix Testbed 1

substitutional compound effects?

88

PCI

Marketing Mix Testbed 2

Feed Back / Reconfiguration complementary compound effects?

MS1

MS2

Research !

PCI: Problem Centered Interviews MS: Market Segment

4P‘s Marketing Mix and Marketing Testbed for innovative HiTech Start Up‘s

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

TRL Technology Readiness Level 89







Development of high-tech technological systems typically depends on the successfully synchronized development of the individual technologies needed. If this synchronization is suboptimal, this will have performance, scheduling and budgetary consequences. The successful development of an innovative system depends highly on the successful management of the alignment of these individual technology pathways. Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Example of multidisciplinary design of an innovation 90

Disciplines required: • Chemistry • Electrochemistry • Material science • Functional material knowledge • Fluid dynamics • Electrical engineering • Direct current knowledge Technologies: • Flow battery technology • Microelectronic • Real time programming • Fail safe software design • Power electronics + MARKETING, LAW, BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Rainer Hasenauer 5/26/2016 Marketing of Research Results

Example MDC for R&D in Flow Battery New Product Development*) 91

EXAMPLE: Electrical Energy Storage Innovation Project: MDC Requirements Know How Electrochemistry Electronics & High Tech Innovation requirements Applied Physics electrical engineering Marketing

Semiotics Syntactic Semantic

Pragmatic

A Stoichiometry, CFD (computational fluid dynamics)

B/C IC-Logic, rule set of electrical engineering,

D Market response function model, social percolation, diffusion models

V2O5: Divanadium Charging/discharging, TAM, WtP, Price Model, Business Model, Marketing pentoxide; electrolyte electrolyte lifetime, Mix concentration, graphite thermal behavior, surface environmental conditions Self-discharge=>Min.! Availability > 99,99% Optimize ROI! Energy density > Charging time < 3 hrs. Optimize ROS! 250mWh/cm3 DoD1 > x% s.t. PU! & PEoU! How to cope with mutual goal conflicts? How to design MDC?

Hasenauer, Rainer; Filo,Peter; Störi, Herbert “The Marketing of High-Tech Innovation: Research and Teaching as a Multidisciplinary Communication Task” in: 1st International M-Sphere Conference for Multidisciplinarity in Science and Business, Dubrovnik 4-6 Oktober 2012, ISBN 978-953-7930-00-4, S. 157-168

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

A6: Business Model, Triple Base Line, Market Percolation Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

1) Business Model, Value Chain 2) Triple Base Line 3) Market Percolation

92

5/26/2016

1) Business Model , Value Chain (Product) 93

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

www.winningware.com

5/26/2016

OBU = on board unit FCD = floating car data

OBU Provider

COOPERS on board unit

Positioning Position Provider

Content Provider

Application Provider / Content Aggregator

Data clearance

Service Provider (Data Distribution)

FCD

Third Parties Data Customizing

94

End User (Motorway Drivers)

R&D-Project COOPERS, Traffic-Information-System, Basic Value Chain

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Why is it necessary to know the value chain? 95

 To

have a clear picture of the whole production chain (product or service)  To identify which parts of the value chain are done by which partner (one part each partner, more?)?  To know which partners are necessary to come up with the final product/service?  To identify weak/strong parts in the value chain?  To have a clear picture which parts of the value chain can be influenced by yourself?  To have a basis for your business model! Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

What is a business model? 96

A

lot of different definitions  “Buzzword” (28.700.000 Google-Hits in 0,59 seconds)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

What is a business model? Idea? 97

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

What is a business model? Network? 98

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

What is a business model? Growth? 99

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

What is a business model? Income? 100

€,IRR,$ A lot of definitions and functions – But all comes down to the question: “How to make money?” Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Business model as a cognitive map across domains 101

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research

Chesbrough, Open Innovation, 2003 Results

5/26/2016

Service Provider

Service

Fee Customer

102

Service Business Model (easy)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Service Provider

Service

Fee

Customer

Product purchase 103

Third party (e.g. Advertising)

Service Business Model (Three parties)

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

104

Complex Business Model

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Business Model Canvas Osterwalder/Pigneur, Business Model Generation, 2010 105

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Functions of a Business model (1) 106







To articulate the value proposition, that is, the value created for users by the offering based on the technology To identify a market segment, that is, the users to whom the technology is useful and the purpose for which it will be used To define the structure of the firm‘s value chain, which is required to create and distribute the offering, and to determine the complementary assets needed to support the firm‘s position in this chain

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research

Chesbrough, Open Innovation, 2003 Results

5/26/2016

Functions of a Business model (2) 107







To specify the revenue generation mechanism(s) for the firm, and estimate the cost structure and target margins of producing the offering, given the value proposition and value chain structure chosen To describe the position of the firm within the value network linking suppliers and customers, including identification of potential complementary firms and competitors To formulate the competitive strategy by which the innovating firm will gain and hold advantage over rivals

Chesbrough, Open Innovation, 2003 Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

108

Open Innovation Paradigm Chesbrough 2010, Renewing Growth from Industrial R&D

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Open Business Models 109

Why Companies Should Have Open Business Models: Magazine: Winter 2007 January 01, Henry W. Chesbrough

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Free is a business model (1) 110

Chris Anderson: Free, 2010

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Free is a business model (2) 111

Chris Anderson: Free, 2010

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Free is a business model (3) 112

Chris Anderson: Free, 2010

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Free is a business model (4) 113

Chris Anderson: Free, 2010

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

FREE Rules – principles of abundance thinking (Chris Anderson: Free, 2010) 114

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

If it‘s digital, sooner or later it‘s going to be free. You can‘t stop Free. You can make money from Free. Sooner or later you will compete with Free. Free makes other things more valuable. ….

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

The long tail

www.thelongtail.com (Chris Anderson)

115

MAINSTREAM

INDIVIDUAL PRODUCTS

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Long tail markets and fundamental NPD*) problems 116









More heterogeneous customer needs result in higher expenses to access sticky information (or higher flop rates, respectively) Providing larger variety demands a broader solution space, hence more solution information In addition, navigating long tail markets also often comes at high cost of building, managing and providing assortments Companies face a trade-off between the benefits of serving the long tail and the cost associated with it (as customers‘ additional WTP is limited) *) NPD New Product Development

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

New Product Development 117

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Mass Customization 118

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Mass Customization - Nike 119

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Getting to plan B (Mullins, Komisar) (1) 120



The business model concept is in the book defined as the pattern of economic activity comprising of five key elements that together determines the viability of any business. The five key elements being the revenue model, the gross margin model, the operating model, the working capital model and the investment model. Companies are successful when the five elements work coherently together.

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Getting to plan B (Mullins, Komisar) (2) 121



Getting to Plan B is about the process of discovering a business model that works, with the assumption that the initial plan is most often wrong. The discovering process can be made systematic by constantly formulating different hypotheses and measurements and continuously follow up and iterate the business model into a new Plan B.

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Getting to plan B (Mullins, Komisar) (III) 122



The starting point for a new business model is to learn from successful examples worth mimicking in some way and examples to which you explicitly choose to do things differently, where the ultimate judge is the customer and the cash flow generated from your business model.

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

The Triple Bottom Line 



Tradeoffs between economic drivers, environmental impact and social impact Triple Rationality (economic, ecologic, social) Economic Drivers

Startup Firm Environmental Impact 5/26/2016

Social Impact Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

123

124

Questions Session 2

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Questions Session 2 (I) 125



 



What are the main differences between traditional product marketing and high tech marketing? What are the features of high tech markets? Which sources of uncertainties are typical for market entry in the high tech context? Please explain Innovation Half Life and its managerial implications considering the decision space model of Chakravarthy?

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

Questions Session 2 (II) 126

 









What is technology acceptance? What are the marketability conditions for innovative high tech products? What is assimilation gap? How do you measure assimilation gap? How do you explain the concept of window of opportunity? Explain the multi-criteria decision task of marketing management of a high tech start up. What are typical KPI‘s for high tech marketing? Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

5/26/2016

A7: Questions/Answers/Discussion using examples of the audience • Final Discussion: – Your take away’s? – What did you miss?

5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

127

THANK YOU! Q&A

Contact:

MAIL1: [email protected] MAIL2: [email protected] SKYPE: rainer.hasenauer 5/26/2016

Rainer Hasenauer Marketing of Research Results

128