Design for Better Comprehension: Design Opportunities for Facilitating Consumers’ Comprehension of Really New Products (RNPs)

Developing successful really new products (RNPs) can bring competitive advantages for companies. However, the success rate of RNPs is relatively low because consumers often feel resistant to adopt them. One reason for consumers’ resistance is their lack of comprehension of RNPs. To facilitate consumers’ comprehension, this paper conceptually discusses the opportunities related to designing the appearances of RNPs. More specifically, to facilitate consumers’ internal and external learning, this paper explores four underlying mechanisms: (1) product appearance as a visual cue to trigger category-based knowledge transfer, (2) to trigger analogy-based knowledge transfer, (3) product appearance as an information carrier to communicate innovative functionality directly, and (4) product appearance as a way to trigger congruity with innovative functionality of RNPs. The rationales for each underlying mechanism are conceptually discussed, supported with relevant empirical evidence, and examples found in the markets. Designers are frequently involved in developing really new products (RNPs), which can gain competitive advantages for companies (Dougherty, 1992). RNPs (a.k.a. discontinuous or radical innovations) refer to new products that integrate advanced technology that has rarely been used in the industry before and enables consumers to do things they were previously unable to do (Garcia & Calantone, 2002; Song & Montoya-Weiss, 1998). For example, a smart home system is a RNP that connects a network of sensors and an information terminal to collect immediate information at home. Through an app on a smart phone, consumers can monitor and control situations at home distantly, which consumers could never do before. In contrast to RNPs, incrementally new products (INPs) integrate current technologies. INPs (a.k.a. discontinuous or radical innovations) provide new benefits, features, or improvements on existing products. For instance, the launch of the first iPhone was considered a RNP, while the later versions (e.g., iPhone 6) are considered INPs because they provide incrementally functional improvements based on previous versions. Although successful RNPs can provide companies with competitive advantages, the success rate of RNPs is relatively low (Cooper & Kleinschmidt, 1987). The success of RNPs ultimately depends on consumers’ adoption of RNPs (Hauser et al., 2006). However, consumers often feel resistant to adopt RNPs (Ram & Sheth, 1989). One of the reasons for consumers’ resistance is consumers’ lack of comprehension. Differently from INPs, which consumers can understand relatively easily based on accumulated knowledge and experience, gaining comprehension of RNPs is difficult for consumers (Hoeffler, 2003). They may not understand how RNPs work and what benefits RNPs can provide (Hoeffler & Herzenstein, 2011) because the knowledge that is needed to understand the new technology goes beyond consumers’ current knowledge (Gatignon & Robertson, 1985) and the integration of really new technology also calls for completely different ways of thinking and new usage patterns (Veryzer, 1998).