Stakeholder contributions to

commercialization and market creation of a

radical innovation: bridging the micro- and
macro levels
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos
Unit of Industrial Engineering and Management, Tampere University, Tampere, Finland

Abstract
Purpose – Successful commercialization is crucial to innovative firms, but further investigation is needed on how diverse stakeholders can
contribute to the commercialization of a radical innovation that requires particular market creation support. This paper aims to, therefore, analyze
the key stakeholders and their contributive activities in commercialization and market creation, particularly in the case of radical innovations.
Design/methodology/approach – This study relies on qualitative research design including interviews with key stakeholders, such as regulators,
scientists, experts, licensing partners, core company representatives and extensive secondary data. This single-case study concerns a functional food
product, which is a radical innovation requiring the development of a novel product category positioned between the food and medicine categories
in global market settings. Since its market launch in 1995, the involvement of multiple stakeholders was needed for its successful commercialization
in over 30 countries.
Findings – Results uncover the contributions of diverse stakeholders to commercialization and market creation, particularly of radical innovation.
Stakeholders performed market creation activities such as regulating the marketing and labeling of food products, conducting safety assessments,
revealing and validating the positive health effects of the novelty and raising awareness of healthy living and cardiovascular health. The
commercialization activities included distributing the products overseas, applying the ingredient to different food products and making the products
available for users.
Research limitations/implications – This single-case study provides an overview of the positive stakeholder activities with contributions to market
creation and commercialization of functional food innovations. Although the user perspective was not included in the empirical part of this study
because of our focus on B2B actors, users of the innovation can contribute to R&D activities to a great extent.
Originality/value – The developed framework of stakeholders’ contributive activities in radical innovation commercialization and market creation
contributes to literature discussing market creation as well as commercialization within the marketing and innovation management research fields.
This work also generates practical advice for managers who commercialize (radical) innovations.
Keywords Market creation, Commercialization, Innovation management, Stakeholders, Functional food, Radical innovation
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction activity in the innovation process, defined as the dissemination of

the innovation to the market(s) and generating profits because of
The improvements in existing processes, services or products this dissemination (Costa et al., 2004; Crawford, 2008). Markets
can be regarded as innovation, and it involves development, are the outcomes of intentional and designed actions for
improvement and change, following the idea generation in an innovations to emerge, which require firms to engage in market-
organization (O’Sullivan and Dooley, 2008). Successful
commercialization is crucial for all innovative firms to stay in
business and be profitable (Aarikka-Stenroos and Sandberg, © Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos. Published by Emerald
2012; Lin et al., 2015; Marx and Hsu, 2015). It often requires Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons
involving diverse stakeholders as they can support the innovator Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute,
firm in taking the innovation to the market (Aarikka-Stenroos translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial
and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original
et al., 2017; Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2014; Reypens et al., 2016).
publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at
Commercialization is considered to be the final innovation http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

The authors would like to thank Ulla Saari and Lauri Litovuo for their
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald constructive feedback.
Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/0885-8624.htm This work is supported by the research grant that was awarded by the
Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation.

Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing

Received 16 March 2022
38/13 (2023) 31–44 Revised 16 August 2022
Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 0885-8624] 23 November 2022
[DOI 10.1108/JBIM-03-2022-0136] Accepted 30 November 2022

31
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

shaping activities in their favor (Fehrer et al., 2020; Lipnickas research, instead, applies a macro and mesolevels approach as it
et al., 2020; Nenonen et al., 2019). Multiple studies in the field of examines the market as a dynamic evolving structure that is
industrial, B2B and innovation marketing acknowledge the modified when innovator firms introduce novelties in
relevance of stakeholders throughout the innovation process collaboration with stakeholders (Fehrer et al., 2020; Lipnickas
(Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2014; Canning and Szmigin, 2016; Hao et al., 2020; Nenonen et al., 2019). Such dynamics can be seen
and Feng, 2016; Kazadi et al., 2016; Lievens and Blaževic, 2021; where a new network of stakeholders such as codevelopment
Lim et al., 2017; Manser et al., 2016; Reypens et al., 2016). It is partners, distribution channel agents and ultimate users emerge
emphasized that the collaboration among stakeholders can boost (O’Connor and Rice, 2013; Sarasvathy and Dew, 2005). From
the innovation diffusion, refine the innovation process and this discussion, the interplay between commercialization and
contribute to the development and implementation of innovations market creation comes into play.
(Makkonen and Johnston, 2014; Schiavone and Simoni, 2019; The actors who are already embedded in an existing market
Widen et al., 2014). However, there is still a lack of empirical-based structure can support the creation of a new market that is needed
understanding of how diverse stakeholders can advance successful for the commercialization of a radical innovation, by companies.
commercialization and market creation of radical innovations. To To succeed in this, apart from improving innovation’s technical
respond to this gap in the literature, the objective of this study is to performance, the focus should also be on assessing innovation’s
identify the key stakeholders and their contributive activities for readiness and match with the market. Support from diverse
commercialization and market creation of a radical innovation. Our market actors, that is, stakeholders, such as value chain actors,
context for radical innovation is the functional food market. regulators, experts, researchers and public organizations can help
Stakeholders are defined as “groups and individuals who an innovator firm not only in successfully developing an
have a stake in the success or failure of an organization” innovation but also in enabling it on the market. For instance,
(Freeman et al., 2010). Extant studies on stakeholders’ relevant Tesla created a new electric vehicle market by building the product
inputs to innovation have acknowledged that these inputs can and the required value chain for producing the batteries to run the
be studied from the perspective of commercialization of the vehicle, setting up compatible charging stations as well as the self-
particular innovation as well as from market creation and driving computer control systems. Not only it created a product
development of new business fields perspective (Aarikka- but also the complementary necessities to create a new market and
Stenroos and Lehtimäki, 2014; Hietanen and Rokka, 2015; commercialize this radical innovation, which required the
Hillebrand et al., 2015; Manser et al., 2016; Nenonen et al., involvement of various types of stakeholders in the value chain. By
2019; O’Connor and Rice, 2013). Particularly in the case of understanding the full diversity of stakeholders and their
radical innovations, for which markets do not yet exist and contribution potential to commercialization and market creation,
market structures and configurations are changing or developing, an innovator company can engage its stakeholders and align its
the line between commercialization and market creation can be goals with them. To address this objective, we present the research
thin and blurred (Aarikka-Stenroos and Lehtimäki, 2014; Möller, question of the study:
2010). Radical innovations are developed with the aim of
commercialization, and they are innovations that lead to the RQ. How do stakeholders contribute to commercialization
transformation of existing markets and creation of new markets and market creation?
(Leifer et al., 2000). We argue that in order for a radical innovation
to be commercialized and reach its users, the market actors should To answer this question, we will map both the diverse stakeholders
be aligned, existing market structures should be modified and a and their contributive activities in the commercialization of the
new market should be created. Commercialization is defined as a focal innovation at microlevel and related market creation at
set of decisions that influence the product’s introduction and macrolevel and their interlinkages.
position in a market (Aarikka-Stenroos and Lehtimäki, 2014; We conduct a qualitative study piecing together the relevant
Hultink et al., 1997). Therefore, it is crucial to highlight the market literature on commercialization, market creation and the
creation aspect: the foundation of market creation lies in the stakeholder approach and empirical based knowledge from a
interplay between the actors on the micro–meso levels and the single-case study including versatile stakeholders (regulators,
market configuration on the macro–meso levels, which explains scientists, experts, business partners, core company representatives)
how markets are shaped and developed (Peters et al., 2020; and extensive secondary data. The single-case study concerns a
Storbacka and Nenonen, 2011; Windahl et al., 2020). Microlevel functional food product, which is a radical innovation requiring the
includes the organizational and individual level and examines the development of a novel product category between food and
smallest levels of interaction. Mesolevel includes established medicine categories in global market settings. Since its market
business fields and networks that determine technological launch in 1995, the involvement of many stakeholders was needed
trajectories through the activity patterns of techno-economic and for its successful commercialization in over 30 countries. Single-
social actors. Macrolevel includes sociopolitical actors such as case studies provide an empirically rich, holistic account of specific
nation states and political coalitions that influence slowly phenomena (Yin, 2003), and therefore, they allow researchers
evolving sociotechnical landscapes (Möller, 2010). The focus of to examine stakeholder activities in more depth. The study
commercialization research is inherently on the micro- and contributes to the discussion on the stakeholder activities for
mesolevels, as it examines an innovator company’s attempts to commercialization and market creation of radical innovations
take a novelty to the market where stakeholders play an important especially from the perspective of the functional food context.
role (Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2017; Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2014; The study also contributes to the market creation literature,
Chiesa and Frattini, 2011; Corsaro et al., 2012; Driessen and innovation marketing and commercialization literature and to the
Hillebrand, 2013; Nieto and Santamaría, 2007). Market creation stakeholders’ contributions to innovation development.

32
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

Functional food is defined to be any modified food or food  designing, configuring and positioning the innovation and
ingredient that may provide a health benefit and reduce the its functionalities in a way that it meets early adopters’
risk of disease beyond the traditional nutrients it contains expectations; and
(Bloch and Thomson, 1995; Heasman and Mellentin,  launching the product only when the development of the
2001). Industries such as medical equipment or functional product configuration is complete (Aarikka-Stenroos and
food involve sensitive elements and typically encounter Lehtimäki, 2014; Chiesa and Frattini, 2011; Perks and
strict regulations because of primary health concerns. This Moxey, 2011).
aspect lets us consider a wide spectrum of stakeholders,
including regulators and scientists involved in the study,
2.2 Market creation driven by diverse stakeholders –
which increases the stakeholder diversity and thus provides
macrolevel approach
different perspectives on commercialization and market
Innovation and particularly radical innovation trigger and
creation activities.
anticipate changes in the market structure (Storbacka and
This work is structured as follows: following this introduction,
Nenonen, 2011). New business fields around innovations
relevant literature on commercialization, market creation and the
emerge, as discussed by Möller (2010) with the example of the
stakeholder approach to innovation are presented in Section 2. In
emergence of functional foods based on biotechnology, in
Section 3, the research methodology, the overview of the research
context and the radical innovation case are covered. In Section 4, comparison with traditional food networks. The actors and
stakeholders in the functional food industry and their activities in stakeholders in such settings should be able to perceive,
commercialization and market creation are presented. In interpret and construct the meaning of an emerging business
Section 5, the summary of the results are presented. In Section 6, landscape for markets to be created (Weick, 1995).
The emergence of a new business field deals with two aspects:
we conclude the paper, discuss our theoretical contributions and
exploring for future business in a changing environment and the
managerial implications, and present the limitations and
construction and communication of a development agenda,
directions for future research.
targeting commercial applications. The business fields framework
portrays sociotechnological structures that facilitate the emergence
2. Theoretical background of markets (Möller, 2010). These structures are explained through
In this section, we present our theoretical building blocks, macro–meso–microlevel layers. The macrolevel includes public
starting from commercialization and market creation and their authorities, political agents and cultural value systems, which
activities and then show how stakeholders are seen to be influences the emergence of new industries through regulatory
engaged in such activities, in the light of the extant research and policy support (Georgallis et al., 2019). The mesolevel
knowledge. includes established business fields where the path to new markets
is developed through evolving knowledge bases and activity
2.1 Commercialization of radical innovation driven by a patterns of actors, which modifies the macrolevel landscape.
company – microlevel approach Microlevel has an influence on changes in the current established
Commercialization involves marketing communications, internal business fields. The actors who are involved in science and
training, global launch and distribution (Chiesa and Frattini, technology-based innovation activity are regarded as innovation
2011; Guiltinan, 1999; Hultink et al., 1997; Jolly, 1997). niches who act as incubators for radical innovations and provide
O’Connor and Rice (2013) argue that one part of the opportunities for radical knowledge creation. Innovation niches
commercialization process is the creation of a new business, prompt changes at the macrolevel regarding regulations and
which may include new markets, new revenue models and new policies. Proactive companies intentionally influence innovation
partners. Commercialization process of a radical innovation niches to change the meso- and macrolevels to construct
starts with the innovator firm and develops as other actors are new markets. However, the markets might not necessarily
involved to shape a new market that is needed for the radical evolve as managers expect, because of uncertainties in the
innovation. Regardless of the success potential of the innovation, process (O’Connor and Rice, 2013) and collective action
all companies need support from their industrial and innovation problems (Struben et al., 2020). The market creation activities
networks to execute an effective commercialization process are listed as:
(Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2014). As the timing of setting up the  formulating unique technological designs and commercially
relationships is essential in the commercialization process, it is viable product applications;
advised that firms start building up relationships in advance,  influencing financial institutions, business partners, component
constantly seek feedback, work with partners and share resources and system suppliers and pilot customers on the value-creation
(Perks and Moxey, 2011). The key commercialization activities potential of the new application concept;
of the innovator firm are listed as:  scaling up production and distribution networks;
 planning the timing of the innovation’s preannouncement  providing important regulatory rules and technological
and launch; standards;
 forming long-term partnerships with critical actors in the  forming collaborative networks;
network to disperse innovation tasks and resources;  fostering new resource linkages among stakeholders to
 targeting the innovation at any specific segment; improve value creation and shape the market; and
 facilitating adoption by changing customers’ mindsets  influencing the actions of legislators and regulators for
favorably toward the innovation; ensuring compliance with law (Kaartemo et al., 2020; Möller,
 creating awareness and educating the market; 2010; Nenonen et al., 2019; O’Connor and Rice, 2013).

33
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

Diverse stakeholders are needed to undertake the market creation collective action is needed that paves the way to market
activities. As markets are dynamic structures that are intentionally formation (Lee et al., 2018).
initiated by market actors (Storbacka and Nenonen, 2011), it is
important to consider the diverse stakeholders who can shape 3. Research methodology
those structures and thus make the market structure more
favorable for innovation commercialization. 3.1 Research design and the case
We have chosen and studied a radical innovation case,
following the procedure of theoretical sampling (Patton, 1990)
2.3 Stakeholders contributing to innovation via
by analyzing a functional food innovation – a novel product
commercialization and market creation support
category between food and medicine. We examined the
Next, we build an initial understanding of how stakeholders can
commercialization activities by the innovator company, the
contribute to market creation of innovation and commercialization.
According to the well-established stakeholder theory (Freeman, stakeholders involved in related activities as well as market
1984), stakeholders include diverse groups or individuals involved creation that was needed for a “novel to the world” innovation.
in achieving an organization’s objectives. Studies applying the Functional food has been defined to be any modified food or
stakeholder approach to innovation development (Driessen and food ingredient that may provide a health benefit and reduce
Hillebrand, 2013) and commercialization (Aarikka-Stenroos et al., the risk of disease beyond the traditional nutrients it contains
2014) have identified diverse contributive stakeholders. These (Bloch and Thomson, 1995). The innovation in our case is a
are listed as employees, the mass of users and customers technology-based healthy food innovation that was launched by
(lead users, boundary spanners and communities), suppliers, Raisio in 1995 and has been commercialized with the brand
manufacturers, media, universities, public organizations, expert name Benecol. It is a vegetable fat spread that lowers cholesterol
organizations, investors, financiers, competitors, communities, with its unique ingredient, plant stanol ester, that aims the
policymakers, regulators, governmental bodies, political groups, prevention of cardiovascular diseases and is therefore categorized
trade associations and trade unions, who can contribute by as a functional food in the markets. As the innovation concerns
facilitating and accelerating further adoption, performing practical human health, a multitude of stakeholders was involved in its
commercialization tasks and creating markets for innovations. commercialization and market creation process over the years.
Regarding market creation for innovation, Kaartemo et al. Many medical studies and experiments were conducted by
(2020) discuss indirectly how stakeholders can contribute via scientists and primary health-care actors to test the viability and
institutional work, for example, by rule and price setting, positive health effects of the main ingredient (Miettinen et al.,
generic campaigning and defining market boundaries and 1995; Athyros et al., 2011).
terms. Particularly in complex social and political contexts, the In this study, qualitative analysis of a single case and
significance of the collaboration of multiple stakeholders in multisourcing methodology (interviews and extensive secondary
market creation has been pointed out by numerous scholars data) are used. The case can also be considered to be a distinctive
(Anderson and Gatignon, 2008; Hietanen and Rokka, 2015; case (Patton, 1990), as plant stanol/sterols were among the ten
Humphreys, 2010). Although collaboration is emphasized for greatest innovations in nutritional research introduced in the
market creation, the process may be hindered by prominent years between 1976 and 2006 (Katan et al., 2009). Benecol has
firms that dominate their industry that fail to come to an been one of the first functional food products that created a
agreement on certain issues because of differing interests and completely new market category and attracted many licensing
backgrounds. This is especially relevant for markets that are partners from around the world; thus, it is an optimal case to
emerging at the convergence of distinct industries and for firms study commercialization and market creation facilitated by
that have no prior or inadequate experience of inter-industry stakeholders to form a totally new product category. The case
cooperation (Ozcan and Santos, 2015). allows us to examine both microlevel commercialization
Humphreys (2010) argues that new market creation is a activities by the innovator company (via detailed interviews
political and social process, which is affected by the external with top management) and macrolevel market creation
environment of the firm or industry. To influence this external activities by stakeholders (via documents and interviews with
environment consisting of divergent stakeholders, economic, stakeholders) and to map stakeholder contributions that
psychological, political and public relations related skills are occurred during a long timeframe. The case applies historical
required to address the needs and concerns of each stakeholder analysis that allows examining large-scale phenomena such as
group (Freeman, 1984). Changing the regulatory, cultural- market creation. The timeline of the important events in
cognitive and normative structures by facilitating the constant Benecol’s commercialization process and related market
flow of information can lead to the legitimation of new market creation is illustrated in Figure 1.
creation (Humphreys, 2010; Kim and Mauborgne, 1999).
Legitimation here means the process of making a practice or 3.2 Data gathering
institution socially, culturally, and politically acceptable Multisourcing and various data collection methods were
(Suchman, 1995). Transforming the regulatory structure used to capture the viewpoints of both business actors and
requires a shift in the rule-setting and monitoring activities of societally relevant stakeholders. The primary data includes
authorities, while changing the cultural-cognitive structure semistructured interviews with open-ended questions to
implies shifting the taken-for-granted understandings about an internal and external stakeholders. As secondary data, an
organization or innovation. Lastly, changing the normative extensive set of over 100 documents are examined: media
structure involves changing the norms and values in the social articles on Benecol’s commercialization, market creation
environment (Humphreys, 2010). To change these structures, and stakeholders; scientific research on plant stanols

34
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

Figure 1 Timeline of the important events in Benecol’s commercialization and market creation

First arcle Raisio (Benecol) Plant stanol

Invenon of about Landmark received the ester was
USA market Frost and selected as one
Studies on plant stanol sitostanol study that
entry, failure Sullivan Award of the ten New licensing
the effects of ester by ester- proves the
due to wrong for Brand greatest partner in
sitosterols on Finnish margarine cholesterol
strategy, re- Development discoveries in USA
human health company treatment reducon was
entry Strategy nutrion
Raisio was published published
in a journal Leadership worldwide

1950- 1989 1994 1998-1999 2006 2015

1970 2009
1995 2022
1980s 1992 2000

Forestry First clinical Benecol was FDA

study on E.U
company firstly launched authorized the
sitostanol Commission Product is in
Kaukas in Finland and use of the
ester- authorized use in over 30
offered to use commercializa- health claim
margarine the use of the countries and
the on to other for
treatment was health claim global
woodwaste countries began phytosterols
presented at a for plant markets
for analyzing and plant
conference stanol ester
sitosterols stanol in USA

published in various academic journals; the innovator firm’s 3.3 Data analysis
website for comprehensive information on the relevant In the analysis phase, thematic content analysis was used, and
stakeholders; and publicly accessible documents and books, the focus was on identifying the events, decisions, activities,
which enabled to identify the stakeholders involved in the opportunities and challenges in the market creation and
study. The LexisNexis news search engine was used to commercialization process from the primary data. As an
gather relevant news articles. The data sources are listed in example of thematic analysis, business partner from the USA
Table 1. stated, “People don’t eat margarines in US so we came up
The interviewees represent different key stakeholder roles: with new products such as chocolate chews and coffee
commercial and legislative counselors from a regulatory cream.” Business partner from Indonesia also stated, “The
authority, public health expert, scientist, science and nutrition challenge is coming from the ingredient that it must be
communication manager from the innovator firm, the inventor consumed after you have a meal. This is a problem in
of Benecol, the brand/marketing director of the innovator firm Indonesia since they (people) don’t eat bread. Therefore, we
and two business partners from the value chain. The need to exist in that liquid food format.” These statements
interviewees were selected based on their experience and were interpreted to explain the market creation activity of the
their contribution to Benecol’s market creation and business partners, which is labelled as making product
commercialization process over 20 years. The interviews were adjustments to meet consumer preferences in the local
retrospective, aiming to track the outcomes of market creation markets. The expert opinion leader stated, “We started to
and commercialization activities over the years. They were have a project not just for patients but in the community of
conducted face to face, online and recorded. Different interview North Karelia and asked people to change their diet to reduce
questions were designed according to stakeholder type, to saturated fat, increase vegetable, fruit, and berries
uncover their specific activities. The details of the conducted consumption. And later on we also took the salt issue because
interviews are listed in Table 2. salt is something that increases blood pressure. There is a

Table 1 Data sources

Source of data Details
Interviews 2017: 4 interviews with the innovator firm
2018: 6 interviews with regulatory authority, public health expert, innovator firm, business partners from the value chain and scientist
News articles >100 news articles about Benecol and lowering cholesterol were retrieved from sources such as The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian and
The New York Times (1996–2019)
Websites >10 websites of Benecol in different regions, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland, Finnish Food Authority, European Food Safety
Authority and related industry associations such as European Atherosclerosis Society
Publications >50 journal articles and a book on Benecol, plant stanol ester, functional foods and cardiovascular diseases

35
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

Table 2 Overview of interviews

Actor type Role Date Duration Theme
Regulatory Commercial and legislative counsellors (food division, food 26.04.2018 52 min Novel food regulation and product authorization
authority safety unit) procedure
Opinion Former director of a research and development institute and 21.05.2018 45 min Awareness creation on cardiovascular health and
leader current member of Finnish Parliament healthy diet
Innovator Science and nutrition communication manager 11.06.2018 52 min Communication activities targeting consumers and
health-care professionals
Innovator Inventor and brands and marketing director 2017 120 min Regulations, abroad markets, communication
activities targeting consumers and health-care
professionals
Business General manager 13.06.2018 45 min Competitive environment, consumer preferences,
partner product variations, regulations in the market
Business Business unit head 25.07.2018 35 min Competitive environment, consumer preferences,
partner product variations, regulations in the market
Scientist Contributor to the research of plant stanols 04.07.2018 87 min Activities that contributed to the research and
validity of the health claims of plant stanols

model explaining how the risk factors predict heart disease market. Another key stakeholder in this case are the legislative
and we know how the risk factors have reduced. Out of the and commercial counselors from the Ministry of Agriculture
individual risk factors, half of the reduction in heart disease and Forestry of Finland. The scope of work of the relevant
mortality seems to be explained by cholesterol reduction and regulatory authorities is listed in Table 4.
it is mainly diet.” This statement was interpreted to explain Among these organizations, the Finnish Food Authority and
the market creation activity of the opinion leaders, which is MMM are the Finnish authorities that are responsible for novel
labelled as creating risk awareness on certain issues in the food regulation; the EFSA and European Commission are
society and explaining the potential impacts of the issues. higher-level European regulatory authorities. In this regulatory
Secondary data, particularly news articles in Benecol and chain, although the last decision is made by the European
Raisio’s history, enabled us to analyze the critical stakeholders Commission, EFSA has the greatest authority and has the most
in the fields of science and medicine, regulation, market and influence on a marketed product regarding safety assessments
society. Based on the analysis and data triangulation from the and the validity of the health claims. The authorization procedure
combination of primary and secondary data, we created in the of a novel food in Finland is illustrated in Figure 2.
final model a figure depicting the multidirectional interactions In this authorization chain, the activities performed by the
among stakeholders. depicted regulatory authorities help create the market by
evaluating the novelty level of the food products and assessing
4. Diversity of stakeholder contributions to their safety, as these activities ensure that products carry no
commercialization and market creation of a risks to health. To give an example, some activities performed
radical and societally relevant innovation by MMM are explained by the Commercial Counsellor and
Legislative Counsellor respectively:
Next, we discuss the results of the case analysis and the
I am in charge of drafting new legislation, implementing current legislation,
contributions of the diverse stakeholders to the helping interpreting legislation as my background is in functional foods and
commercialization of the innovative product, Benecol, and gene technology. We are taking care of a regulation that regulates everything
market creation of functional foods. To provide an overview of novel entering into the food chain. Safety is the main concern for novel foods.
our results, Table 3 concludes the stakeholders who influenced
One area I am responsible for is food labeling including health claims and
the innovation commercialization (microlevel) and market nutrition claims. There is a link to functional foods because when a
creation (macrolevel), partly contributing also via value chains company comes up with a new innovation, it tends to claim a health
benefit.
(mesolevel). The stakeholder types and their contributions to
market creation and commercialization are listed in Table 3. Another example clearly explains the crucial role of regulatory
authorities in commercialization and market creation. When
4.1 Stakeholders contributing particularly at macrolevel the company decided to enter the markets in the USA, they
market creation faced problems. US market entry was delayed for about six
4.1.1 Regulatory authorities months because of a wrong strategy applied by Benecol’s
Based on the case analysis, regulatory authorities were found to worldwide marketing partner, as it decided to market the product
be one of the significant stakeholders that contributed to the as a dietary supplement, which was not the product’s right category
creation of the functional food market and commercialization according to the US food regulation requirements. The US Food
of its products. The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is and Drug Administration (FDA) later approved the product as a
the authority that conducts safety assessments for all food regular food with the “Generally Recognized As Safe” status, which
products marketed in Europe, therefore the assessments by made it possible for Benecol to be launched in the USA. In the
EFSA are needed to launch functional food products on the USA, functional foods are still an unclear product category for

36
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

Table 3 Stakeholder types and contributions

Contribution
Type Market creation (macro) Commercialization (micro)
Regulators  Allowing society to start accepting the novelty  Authorizing products to be marketed and sold
 Drafting new legislation, implementing current  Providing guidance on the authorization procedure
legislation
 Conducting and evaluating risk and safety
assessments
Scientists  Generating objective scientific knowledge  Increasing the credibility of an innovation
 Publishing articles, attending seminars and  Revealing the functionality of the innovation/
conferences around the world and thus novelty through studies and experiments, which
disseminating the knowledge can be used as marketing argument for a
product
Experts as opinion leaders  Creating risk awareness on certain issues in the  Increasing the credibility of an innovation
society and explaining the potential impacts of  Making the network actors more aware of the
the issues benefits of the innovation
 Influencing public perceptions and producers’
actions to shift to operations that are more
sustainable
 Publishing articles, attending seminars and
conferences around the world and thus
disseminating the knowledge
Business partners in the value chain  Providing access to local user base in different  Distributing the products locally and making
countries them available for users
 Making product adjustments to meet consumer  Contributing to the diffusion of the innovation
preferences in the local market and thus by representing the innovation in local markets
ensuring the fit between innovation and
different market settings
Innovator firm  Managing the innovation network by facilitating  Initiating the innovation process by discovering
constant information flow between stakeholders or inventing the novelty
Media  Raising awareness on healthy living and  Communicating the value that a product or
cardiovascular health service would create for its user
Users  Using the innovation and experiencing its  Providing feedback about the products’ strengths
benefits at first hand and weaknesses
 Carrying out word-of-mouth marketing
Health-care professionals  Changing the attitude on markets  Recommending the product personally to the
users
 Conveying the product information to the users
who are the target audience
Associations  Organizing educational sessions for health-care  Mentioning the innovation in their guidelines
professionals for awareness creation

Table 4 Focus areas of regulatory authorities

Organization Scope
Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry of Finland (MMM) MMM is responsible for the legislative work on food products as part of the
Finnish government and it collaborates with European Union (EU) institutions
to get support in decision-making
Finnish Food Authority The Finnish Food Authority is a centralized body operating under MMM. It
conducts risk assessments and scientific research
European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) EFSA is the agency of the EU that provides independent scientific advice and
communicates on existing and emerging risks associated with the food chain
European Commission European Commission is an institution of the EU, responsible for proposing
legislation, implementing decisions, upholding the EU treaties and managing
the day-to-day business of the EU

FDA. Functional foods are regarded as foods with health claims claim may require repetitive clinical trials for different product types,
and subject to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. which can be time-consuming and expensive. The requirements
Regulations in some countries can be strict and challenging, and rules for getting approval to market a food product differ on
and obtaining approval for product registration or a health various continents and might even vary in countries on the same

37
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

Figure 2 Authorization procedure for novel foods in Finland: stakeholders assessing risks and claims of the novelty

EU Member
States

Finnish Food European

Innovator Firm EFSA
Authority Commission

Innovator Firm sends EFSA does the safety The Commission authorizes
applicaon to Finnish Food assessments and evaluates the product and the health
Authority for the health the validity of the claims. claims.
claims they want to make on EFSA gives advice to
the products. Firms may European Commission on
seek advice if they are
MMM the risk management
uncertain about the novel decisions.
food status of the products.
Finnish Food Authority
evaluates the novelty and
seeks advice from other EU
Member States and MMM if
help is needed for health
claims.

continent, as is the case in Asia. As the authorization that is granted Scientists contributed by publishing journal articles about the
in the European Union (EU) is valid in many countries, it is effects of plant stanols and attending cardiovascular seminars
convenient for a food company that intends to market its products and conferences around the world to explain the positive health
in Europe. Especially in Asian countries, the long process of product effects of plant stanols to health-care professionals. This
authorization may be a bottleneck for a company and require promoted the market creation of the innovation in many
substantial resources. Furthermore, it may prevent small- and regions, as some of these scientists possess an excellent
medium-sized enterprises from entering Asian markets because of reputation in the field of plant stanol and sterol research.
inadequate resources. However, Benecol was able to become
4.1.3 Experts in public health as opinion leaders
authorized in many Asian markets despite the long authorization
Another important group of stakeholders in the case was public
processes, and its presence was secured with newly developed
health experts who shape other stakeholders’ perceptions of the
products that meet the needs of the consumers in this region. This
innovation and influence their willingness to adopt it. In this
success paved the way to shape the functional food market in Asia in
study, public health experts were found to hold the status of
its favor. As stated by the Benecol’s inventor:
opinion leadership in the field. In this case, we refer to a specific
There are some country-specific requirements for product authorization. individual who has been recognized by public and who has
The approval process can be very complicated and might have to repeat
some of the experimental animal studies that have been done to prove the
great impact on society. Here, the key opinion leader is the
product’s safety. For example, if stanol is to be added to a yogurt product former director of the National Institute for Health and Welfare
and to a soymilk product, separate clinical trials might be needed depending of Finland (THL) (2009–2013). He was formerly the director
on the country regulation (Translated from Finnish).
of the North Karelia Project initiated in 1972 in Finland. The
4.1.2 Scientists initiative succeeded in reducing the male coronary heart disease
mortality rate by 73% in 25 years in the North Karelia region
The empirical results uncover that scientists contributed to the
and by 65% overall in Finland (Puska, 2002). He was also a
research and validity of the health claims of plant stanol ester, the
member of the Finnish Parliament. Thus, the opinion
main ingredient in Benecol. Their work on plant stanols and
leadership relied on both specified expertise and status/
experiments conducted with different doses of daily consumption
legitimacy, thereby strengthening the relevance of expert
revealed the health benefits of plant stanols, contributing to the
commentaries given by the key expert opinion leader of the
creation of a novel functional food for a new market and
focal case.
attracting many global audiences. The research group’s findings
Because of wide, compelling experience in the focal field,
on the effect of different doses of stanol consumption on serum
including his studies and knowledge on the risk factors of
cholesterol levels validated the impact of the innovative
cardiovascular diseases and his success in improving the diet of
ingredient (Miettinen et al., 1995; Athyros et al., 2011), enabling
a nation, he was later involved in the commercialization
other stakeholders to rely on this knowledge. Using different
activities of Benecol. He gave conference speeches and spoke at
types of equipment, scientists measured the functionality of the
annual meetings of Benecol’s business partners, explaining the
arteries. As stated by a Professor of Medicine at the University of
positive health effects of Benecol’s main ingredient, plant stanol
Helsinki:
ester, which raised interest in this innovative ingredient. The
We analyzed the plaques that block the arteries and analyzed the vascular growing trend and attitude toward healthy eating among
effects of Benecol, measured how the arteries are functioning before and
after the use of Benecol. We measured how much blood enters to a very consumers have prompted some other companies in the
small area in a limited time. industry to develop similar healthy food products:

38
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

We spread all kinds of health information for the adoption of a healthier diet best known for its olive oil-based margarine-like spread.
and lifestyle, but we realized that this was not enough. We needed products
to convey the message so that it would be easier for people to switch to
American consumers tend to eat less fat spreads than
healthier eating habits. consumers in Europe, therefore product adjustments were
This movement and effort promoting healthy eating led by a made in the content of the Benecol spread. The efforts were
public health expert and also other companies increased the directed to the products that are widely consumed particularly
demand for such products that have health benefits and by consumers in the USA. As explained by the general manager
promoted the emergence of the functional food market, of the business partner from the USA:
particularly for the cholesterol-lowing products. In this case, People don’t eat margarine in the US, therefore, we came up with new
the public health expert’s previous efforts in the North Karelia products under the Benecol brand, such as chocolate chews and coffee
cream.
Project to lower the cholesterol levels of a population and being
a well-known expert in the cardiovascular field made it easier Using health claims on packaging and in marketing channels
for wider audiences and companies to trust him and his influences the buying decision and eases the commercialization
recommendations, which created awareness and facilitated of products. The wording of the health claim on the packaging
Benecol’s diffusion in various regions. of a certain product might be different in different countries
depending on the food and safety regulations of the country in
4.1.4 Media question. As stated by the general manager of the US business
Based on the secondary data, we share some examples of partner:
information about Benecol that have been published in various
In the European markets, it is possible to claim that using Benecol reduces
media over the years, and we discuss how the news associated cholesterol by 10%, but such claim is not allowed in US. The Food and
with Benecol led to progression of its commercialization and Drug Administration of the US allows the claim that 2 grams of stanol or
market creation. sterol may help reducing cholesterol levels.
Right after its launch in the UK, the company made a deal The partnership with the Indonesian business partner started in
with Carol Vorderman to be the face of Benecol’s UK 2008 and since then, no other competitor has entered the
marketing campaigns in press ads and on TV as a part of its functional food business in Indonesia, making the Finnish
commercialization strategy. As Carol Vorderman was a well- company the market leader in this area. In the Indonesian case,
known and well-liked celebrity in the UK, Benecol’s diffusion the main consideration for a partnership with Raisio and
in the UK market accelerated. incorporating Benecol products in the product range was the
The firm was involved in several campaigns that increased its uniqueness of the ingredient. Having the approval from
visibility in public, such as the campaign for Women Against regulators for claiming health benefits of plant stanol ester
Cholesterol to raise awareness of the risk factors related to high enabled the Benecol brand to appeal to the partner and create a
cholesterol. Additionally, the awards that the company market, as it is the only brand that can use and contain plant
received, such as the Frost and Sullivan Award for Brand stanol ester in Indonesia. The business unit head (BUH) of the
Development Strategy Leadership for demonstrating superior Indonesian business partner explained the reason behind the
market growth, increased the credibility and strengthened the partnership with Benecol:
brand image of the company in many markets. The company
Since Benecol’s plant stanol ingredient is acknowledged by institutions,
also used unconventional ways to promote the brand, such as healthcare professionals, and medical bodies and has exclusivity, we wanted
sponsoring a classical music radio show that was popular to use the Benecol brand in our cholesterol lowering product range.
especially among over 55 years olds, the brand’s target
The healthy food products are differentiated with different
audience.
price levels and the health claims in Indonesia; therefore, they
are regarded as a new product category that is subject to
4.2 Stakeholders contributing at microlevel, to
different regulations, monitoring and safety assessments, which
company’s commercialization efforts
created a new market network. The BUH explained the
4.2.1 Complementing business partners in the value chain: licensing
advantage they gained over their competitors and increased
partners from the USA and Asia
consumer awareness after obtaining permission to use the
With regard to value chain partners in the Benecol case,
health claims in 2014:
business and licensing partners using the same ingredient in
diverse end products, ranging from margarine to beverages, Since 2014, we have been able to claim the cholesterol lowering effect on the
packaging and due to that, people are now more aware of the effects of plant
contributed primarily to the commercialization and stanol. However, we still need to provide education because Benecol is not
secondarily to market creation in several ways. To create like medicine.
functional food markets in different countries, companies
need to consider consumer preferences and dietary trends in 4.2.2 Health-care professionals
those countries. Therefore, local product adjustment Benecol products as a preventive solution for high cholesterol
strategies were applied to attract consumers in various are recommended in different health-care systems around the
countries and to create the user base for the market. world. Health-care professionals are crucial target groups in the
Benecol’s business (licensing) partners from very different local markets; informative and factual messages on the unique
global market contexts from the USA and Indonesia health enhancing qualities of the novel product are needed to
explained their perspective on commercialization as well target those who meet patients. Therefore, the innovator firm
market creation of an innovative product. realized that it is extremely important to train primary health-
The licensing partner from the USA is a food manufacturing care actors to promote the health benefit of a product to public
company that produces spreads and cooking products and is to set up the user base for the innovation. As these actors are in

39
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

close contact with patients, they can influence product authorities (ministries, risk management authorities and regional
diffusion with their product recommendations. Therefore, commissions), (primary healthcare) professionals in different
health-care professionals act as one of the supporting forces in countries, associations, complementing business partners from
the commercialization of functional foods. As stated by the the value chain, media, users and managers of the innovator
Science and Nutrition Communication Manager of the company. These actors contribute:
Innovator Firm:  directly to the commercialization efforts of the innovation led
Communication toward healthcare professionals is of high importance since by the innovator company (e.g. business partners distributing
these experts are influential and can spread the health benefit information of the products locally, thus making them available for users);
Benecol to those who have high cholesterol levels and who need cholesterol  directly to market creation (e.g. regulators conducting
lowering products and treatments. We develop marketing materials for our
business partners to guide healthcare professionals in their regions. We also safety assessments and assessing the validity of the health
work with opinion leaders who are aware of the latest science in the field of claims) that makes the markets more favorable to the
cholesterol lowering and influence the opinions of other healthcare
professionals.
commercialization activities by the innovator company; and
 to the intersection of these two above activities, thereby
Both information spread by health-care professionals and direct fortifying the dynamics and change in the markets, as
consumer communication messages can impact marketing multiple contributors’ contributions accumulate and fortify
efficiency, and they complement each other. The degree of the each other in the momentum (e.g. scientists validating the
emphasis that is put on a certain type of communication functionality of the innovation/novelty through studies and
depends on the health-care system of the country. Having an experiments that enable regulators to allow the innovation at
approved health claim for plant stanol ester in different regions macrolevel and business partners to gain more profit from
is crucial in the context of both health-care professional and the innovation, which supports both the innovator’s and its
consumer communication. This is an important step in business partners’ commercialization efforts at the micro-
commercialization, which provides a positive brand image to and mesolevels).
the firms that can obtain this valuable key criterion.
Our study showcases how actively involving scientists and
4.2.3 Associations public health experts in market creation activities provide
In addition to the health-care professionals’ contribution to the benefits to the innovator firm and increases its credibility. The
market creation of Benecol in different regions, several good reputation of scientists and public health experts makes it
associations around the world (e.g. European Atherosclerosis possible for business partners to trust the innovator firm’s
Society, European Society of Cardiology, International innovation and assess how much they can create value from it,
Atherosclerosis Society, American Diabetes Association and which also encourages them to initiate a partnership with the
the National Heart Foundation of Australia) mention the use of innovator firm. Having participated in academic conferences
plant stanol ester to be an effective way to lower cholesterol in and seminars and having published scientific articles about the
their dyslipidemia treatment and cardiovascular disease benefits of the innovation in well-established journals, scientists
prevention guidelines. These associations act as a group of and public health experts as opinion leaders have the power to
actors that feed health-care professionals with relevant indirectly influence business partners and expert actors that
information. In the congresses of these associations, innovator encourage consumers to adopt and use the innovation.
firm-sponsored educational sessions have drawn the attention Scientists seem to play a major role by validating the value of
of health-care professionals to this alternative way of lowering
the innovation and related impacts, particularly when the
cholesterol, which has promoted Benecol in various markets.
product concerns a societal issue, such as public health. The
scientific experiments by scientists are also needed to prove that
5. Discussion the product is safe to use, causes no harm and generates the
5.1 Key stakeholders’ contributions to intended positive effects.
commercialization and market creation of radical The commercialization and market creation process may be
innovations negatively affected by certain stakeholders. For instance, market
We studied the activities of multiple stakeholders and how they entry of Benecol to the USA was temporarily hindered by FDA
facilitate the creation of a new market on the macrolevel and because of the wrong strategy applied by the licensing partner at
make it possible for an innovation to be commercialized that time. A competitor that has a similar product in markets
because of increased adoption, on the microlevel. These results where Benecol exist may sue the company for the similarity of
and insights based on empirical research data also reveal the the brand name. Such examples show that it is important to
interactive nature of market creation and commercialization. consider these stakeholders that might hinder the process.
We argue that, as our case results show, stakeholders’
contributions regarding commercialization activities directly 5.2 Modelling the commercialization and market
address the innovation marketing goals of the focal innovator creation of a radical innovation via stakeholder
company, whereas their contributions to market creation are contributions
more on the societal level and thus require deeper involvement While stakeholder contributions to commercialization activities are
from the macrolevel actors and scientists to change the market mainly supported (and initiated) by the focal company whose
structure. Therefore, very diverse contributions from various innovation is commercialized, contributions to market creation
contributors are needed to advance the commercialization and activities take place on macrolevel and market structure level.
market creation of a societally relevant innovation. These include These cover both direct contributions to market creation
scientists, public health experts as opinion leaders, regulatory (regulators’ ability to control what can be marketed and how) and

40
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

indirect or interlinked contributions (scientists’ ability to both guide radical innovations along with their contribution to the
societally relevant stakeholders’ actions and validate the value of the facilitation of an innovation’s market creation in global settings.
innovation marketed by business actors). When putting these The results of this study are aligned with earlier insights that
together, we see that market creation entails cocreating and diversity of actors improve the commercialization outcomes
renewing market structures, allowing innovations (particularly (Corsaro et al., 2012) and that stakeholder marketing capabilities
radical innovations) to emerge and to be commercialized. Finally, have an impact on organizations’ performance in the long term
we develop a model that captures how stakeholders contribute to (Hillebrand et al., 2015). Third, we have contributed to
commercialization and market creation of radical innovations the discussion on stakeholders’ contributions to innovation
(Figure 3). development (Driessen and Hillebrand, 2013; Hillebrand et al.,
2015) by developing a framework that captures the supportive
6. Conclusions activities of stakeholders in creating markets, commercializing the
6.1 Theoretical contributions radical innovation, and interlinkages between them (Aarikka-
Our empirical analysis of the diverse stakeholder activities for Stenroos et al., 2014). As our final contribution, we clarify the
market creation and commercialization of a radical, societally relationship between market creation and commercialization of
relevant innovation generates contributions to several research radical innovations, which support each other. We underline that
streams. to commercialize a radical innovation, the existing market
First, we contribute to the market creation literature, structures should be modified in favor of the radical innovation to
bringing forth the diverse stakeholders’ contributions to market emerge via commercialization.
creation of innovations. Building on the argumentation that
single actors facilitate the market creation of an innovation
6.2 Managerial implications
(Fehrer et al., 2020; Lipnickas et al., 2020; Storbacka and
The study generates practical advice for managers who
Nenonen, 2011), our empirical study showcases how diverse
commercialize (radical) innovations, beyond food innovations
actors affected and changed the perception of the relevance of
and functional food industry, and need support in market
the functional foods in society and on the markets. Following
creation as well from diverse stakeholders. The research
the emerging and radical business fields literature (Möller,
2010), our study shows how innovator companies can use findings indicate that the focus of the collaborative activities
experts and scientists that can influence stakeholders at the with stakeholders should not be restricted only to R&D
microlevel, such as suppliers, distribution and customer activities but should also focus on commercialization and
networks, and stakeholders at the macrolevel, such as regulatory market creation. In the first stage of the commercialization of a
authorities in sociotechnological structures for the creation of a radical innovation, managers should be in close contact with
new market. Second, we contribute to the innovation marketing the regulators in the target market to comply with the health
and commercialization literature, as our empirical analysis of claim regulations. Many commercialization decisions by
stakeholder contributions to commercialization clarifies the companies are strongly linked to the development stage of
activities that are needed to support commercialization efforts market and needed market creation, and managers should
and innovation diffusion in markets (Aarikka-Stenroos et al., acknowledge this carefully. For example, in our case, applying
2014; Chiesa and Frattini, 2011; Makkonen and Johnston, 2014; for the feasible product category before launch has been crucial,
Schiavone and Simoni, 2019). We show how the activities of as the products may be placed in different categories in
seven types of stakeholders influence the commercialization of different countries. An undeveloped, not-yet-created market

Figure 3 Stakeholders in commercialization and market creation of radical innovations and their interlinkages

Regulators Sciensts/
(Market creation)

Providing guidance on Experts in Public Health Media

Acng as a facilitator
Macro Level

product authorizaon Creang awareness,

procedure, conducng and influencing business for product adopon
evaluang risk assessments partners, users, regulators, and awareness
to ensure product safety and building a trust network creaon

Healthcare
Business Partners Innovator Firm Professionals/
Providing the local user Iniang the innovaon Associaons
base for the innovaon in
process by discovering or Recommending the
the market, distribung
invenng and by managing product use in different
products and making them
the innovaon network countries for the well-
available for users
(Commercialization)

being of people
Micro Level

Innovator distribute the

products in markets Users
through business partners Innovator provides Giving feedback on
products’ strengths and
training to professionals
weaknesses, carrying
who then recommend out word-of-mouth
the product to users markeng

41
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

missing a feasible product category may cause companies lose Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Jaakkola, E., Harrison, D. and Mäkitalo-
revenue because of market launch delays. Keinonen, T. (2017), “How to manage innovation processes
Our study also shows that companies should involve very in extensive networks: a longitudinal study”, Industrial
diverse stakeholders in radical innovation commercialization Marketing Management, Vol. 67, pp. 88-105.
and related market creation, for example, regulators could Aarikka-Stenroos, L., Sandberg, B. and Lehtimäki, T. (2014),
guide the innovator companies in their attempt to launch their “Networks for the commercialization of innovations: a review
radical innovations and the managers should proactively seek of how divergent network actors contribute”, Industrial
feedback from the regulators regarding market regulations. Marketing Management, Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 365-381, doi:
Active cooperation with scientists and societally legitimate 10.1016/j.indmarman.2013.12.005.
experts plays an important role in creating a market, credibility Anderson, E. and Gatignon, H. (2008), “Firms and the
and building a successful brand image. The key point here is to creation of new markets”, Handbook of New Institutional
involve these stakeholders well in advance and establish shared Economics, Springer, Dordrecht, pp. 401-431, doi: 10.1007/
goals and interests. Feedback from business partners in value 978-3-540-69305-5_17.
chain on marketing practices and new product development Athyros, V.G., Kakafika, A.I., Papageorgiou, A.A., Tziomalos, K.,
activities would enhance the collaboration and communication Peletidou, A., Vosikis, C., Karagiannis, A. and Mikhailidis, D.P.
among parties and introduce and educate on new ways of (2011), “Effect of a plant stanol ester-containing spread, placebo
doing business and task partitioning, thereby improving the spread, or Mediterranean diet on estimated cardiovascular risk
commercialization efforts. For example, in our case, licensing
and lipid, inflammatory and haemostatic factors”, Nutrition,
partners provided important contributions to commercialization
Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases, Vol. 21 No. 3,
and market creation by providing information on how to adjust
pp. 213-221, doi: 10.1016/j.numecd.2009.08.014.
product features and contents based on the user habits in target
Bloch, A. and Thomson, C. (1995), “Position of the American
markets. Such learnings from business partner stakeholders
Dietetic Association. Phytochemicals and functional foods”,
would provide innovator companies better returns on their
Journal of the American Dietetic Association, Vol. 95 No. 4,
investment to enter new markets.
pp. 493-496.
Canning, L. and Szmigin, I. (2016), “Radical innovation,
6.3 Limitations and future research
network competence and the business of body disposal”,
This study is based on a single case study and explored the
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 31 No. 6,
major stakeholders and their activities in the functional food
industry. Our findings on relevant stakeholders and their pp. 771-783, doi: 10.1108/JBIM-05-2014-0110.
contribution to market creation and commercialization can be Chiesa, V. and Frattini, F. (2011), “Commercializing
generalized to many other industries and business settings. As technological innovation: learning from failures in high-tech
innovation activities in the food industry have increased in the markets”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 28
last decade (e.g. innovations such as pulled oats), the findings No. 4, pp. 437-454, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2011.00818.x.
of this study can be generalizable not only to the functional food Corsaro, D., Cantù, C. and Tunisini, A. (2012), “Actors’
industry but also to the food and health-care industry where heterogeneity in innovation networks”, Industrial Marketing
health is a concern. Stakeholder contributions are also relevant Management, Vol. 41 No. 5, pp. 780-789, doi: 10.1016/j.
in many societally grounded settings that involve experts and indmarman.2012.06.005.
regulators (e.g. environmental, sustainable and circular Costa, C., Fontes, M. and Heitor, M.V. (2004), “A methodological
economy innovations). Although the user perspective was not approach to the marketing process in the biotechnology-based
included in the empirical part of this study because of the companies”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 5,
nature of the numerous viewpoints of user perspectives and pp. 403-418.
because of our focus on B2B actors, users of the innovation can Crawford, C.M. (2008), New Products Management, Tata
contribute to R&D activities to a great extent by using the McGraw-Hill Education, New York, NY.
innovation themselves, further developing it, forming Driessen, P.H. and Hillebrand, B. (2013), “Integrating
innovation networks and providing feedback (Lettl et al., multiple stakeholder issues in new product development: an
2006). Therefore, we call for further research to include user exploration”, Journal of Product Innovation Management,
perspective in more detail when examining stakeholders’ Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 364-379.
involvement in market creation and commercialization of Fehrer, J.A., Conduit, J., Plewa, C., Li, L.P., Jaakkola, E. and
radical innovations. Alexander, M. (2020), “Market shaping dynamics: interplay of
actor engagement and institutional work”, Journal of Business
& Industrial Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 9, pp. 1425-1439, doi:
References 10.1108/JBIM-03-2019-0131.
Aarikka-Stenroos, L. and Lehtimäki, T. (2014), “Commercializing Freeman, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder
a radical innovation: probing the way to the market”, Industrial Approach, Pitman, Boston.
Marketing Management, Vol. 43 No. 8, pp. 1372-1384, doi: Freeman, R., Harrison, J., Wicks, A., Parmar, B. and De
10.1016/j.indmarman.2014.08.004. Colle, S. (2010), Stakeholder Theory: The State of the Art,
Aarikka-Stenroos, L. and Sandberg, B. (2012), “From new- Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, doi: 10.1017/
product development to commercialization through networks”, CBO9780511815768.
Journal of Business Research, Vol. 65 No. 2, pp. 198-206, doi: Georgallis, P., Dowell, G. and Durand, R. (2019), “Shine on
10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.05.023. me: industry coherence and policy support for emerging

42
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

industries”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 64 No. 3, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 95, pp. 128-141, doi:
pp. 503-541, doi: 10.1177/0001839218771550. 10.1016/j.indmarman.2021.04.007.
Guiltinan, J.P. (1999), “Launch strategy, launch tactics, and Lim, J.S., Darley, W.K. and Marion, D. (2017), “Market
demand outcomes”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, orientation, innovation commercialization capability and
Vol. 16 No. 6, pp. 509-529. firm performance relationships: the moderating role of
Hao, B. and Feng, Y. (2016), “How networks influence radical supply chain influence”, Journal of Business & Industrial
innovation: the effects of heterogeneity of network ties and Marketing, Vol. 32 No. 7, pp. 913-924, doi: 10.1108/JBIM-
crowding out”, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 10-2016-0238.
Vol. 31 No. 6, pp. 758-770, doi: 10.1108/JBIM-09-2012- Lin, Y., Wang, Y. and Kung, L.A. (2015), “Influences of cross-
0165. functional collaboration and knowledge creation on technology
Heasman, M. and Mellentin, J. (2001), The Functional Foods commercialization: evidence from high-tech industries”,
Revolution: Healthy People, Healthy Profits? Earthscan, London. Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 49, pp. 128-138, doi:
Hietanen, J. and Rokka, J. (2015), “Market practices in 10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.04.002.
countercultural market emergence”, European Journal of Lipnickas, G., Conduit, J., Plewa, C. and Wilkie, D. (2020),
Marketing, Vol. 49 Nos 9/10, pp. 1563-1588, doi: 10.1108/ “How much is enough? The role of effort in market shaping”,
EJM-02-2014-0066. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 9,
Hillebrand, B., Driessen, P.H. and Koll, O. (2015), “Stakeholder pp. 1441-1451, doi: 10.1108/JBIM-03-2019-0132.
marketing: theoretical foundations and required capabilities”, Makkonen, H.S. and Johnston, W.J. (2014), “Innovation
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol. 43 No. 4, adoption and diffusion in business-to-business marketing”,
pp. 411-428, doi: 10.1007/s11747-015-0424-y. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, Vol. 29 No. 4,
Hultink, E.J., Griffin, A., Hart, S. and Robben, H.S.J. (1997), pp. 324-331, doi: 10.1108/JBIM-08-2013-0163.
“Industrial new product launch strategies and product Manser, K., Hillebrand, B., Klein Woolthuis, R., Ziggers, G.W.,
development performance”, Journal of Product Innovation Driessen, P.H. and Bloemer, J. (2016), “An activities-based
Management, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 243-257.
approach to network management: an explorative study”,
Humphreys, A. (2010), “Megamarketing: the creation of
Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 55, pp. 187-199, doi:
markets as a social process”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 74
10.1016/j.indmarman.2015.10.004.
No. 2, pp. 1-19, doi: 10.1509/jm.74.2.1.
Marx, M. and Hsu, D.H. (2015), “Strategic switchbacks: dynamic
Jolly, V.K. (1997), Commercializing New Technologies: Getting
commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs”,
from Mind to Market, Harvard Business School Press, Boston.
Research Policy, Vol. 44 No. 10, pp. 1815-1826, doi: 10.1016/j.
Kaartemo, V., Nenonen, S. and Windahl, C. (2020),
respol.2015.06.016.
“Institutional work by market-shaping public actors”,
Miettinen, T.A., Puska, P., Gylling, H., Vanhanen, H. and
Journal of Service Theory and Practice, Vol. 30 Nos 4/5,
Vartiainen, E. (1995), “Reduction of serum cholesterol with
pp. 401-435, doi: 10.1108/JSTP-08-2019-0176.
sitostanol-ester margarine in a mildly hypercholesterolemic
Katan, M.B., Boekschoten, M.V., Connor, W.E., Mensink, R.P.,
Seidell, J., Vessby, B. and Willett, W. (2009), “Which are the population”, New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 333 No. 20,
greatest recent discoveries and the greatest future challenges in pp. 1308-1312, doi: 10.1056/NEJM199511163332002.
nutrition?”, European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Vol. 63 No. 1, Möller, K. (2010), “Sense-making and agenda construction in
pp. 2-10, doi: 10.1038/sj.ejcn.1602923. emerging business networks – how to direct radical
Kazadi, K., Lievens, A. and Mahr, D. (2016), “Stakeholder co- innovation”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 39 No. 3,
creation during the innovation process: identifying capabilities pp. 361-371, doi: 10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.03.014.
for knowledge creation among multiple stakeholders”, Journal Nenonen, S., Storbacka, K. and Windahl, C. (2019),
of Business Research, Vol. 69 No. 2, pp. 525-540, doi: 10.1016/ “Capabilities for market-shaping: triggering and facilitating
j.jbusres.2015.05.009. increased value creation”, Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Kim, W.C. and Mauborgne, R. (1999), “Creating new market Science, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 617-639, doi: 10.1007/s11747-
space”, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 77 No. 1, pp. 83-93. 019-00643-z.
Lee, B.H., Struben, J. and Bingham, C.B. (2018), “Collective Nieto, M.J. and Santamaría, L. (2007), “The importance of
action and market formation: an integrative framework”, diverse collaborative networks for the novelty of product
Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 242-266, innovation”, Technovation, Vol. 27 Nos 6/7, pp. 367-377.
doi: 10.1002/smj.2694. O’Sullivan, D. and Dooley, L. (2008), Applying Innovation,
Leifer, R., McDermott, C., O’connor, G., Peters, L., Rice, M. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
and Veryzer, R. (2000), Radical Innovation: How Mature O’Connor, G.C. and Rice, M.P. (2013), “New market creation for
Companies Can Outsmart Upstarts, Harvard Business School breakthrough innovations: enabling and constraining
Press, Boston, MA. mechanisms”, Journal of Product Innovation Management, Vol. 30
Lettl, C., Herstatt, C. and Gemuenden, H.G. (2006), “Users’ No. 2, pp. 209-227, doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5885.2012.00996.x.
contributions to radical innovation: evidence from four cases Ozcan, P. and Santos, F.M. (2015), “The market that never was:
in the field of medical equipment technology”, R&D turf wars and failed alliances in mobile payments”, Strategic
Management, Vol. 36 No. 3, pp. 251-272. Management Journal, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 1486-1512, doi:
Lievens, A. and Blaževic, V. (2021), “A service design 10.1002/smj.2292.
perspective on the stakeholder engagement journey during Patton, M. (1990), Qualitative Research and Evaluation
B2B innovation: challenges and future research agenda”, Methods, Sage Publishing, Thousand Oaks, CA.

43
 Radical innovation Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing
Anil Engez and Leena Aarikka-Stenroos Volume 38 · Number 13 · 2023 · 31–44

Perks, H. and Moxey, S. (2011), “Market-facing innovation formation”, Strategy Science, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 245-270, doi:
networks: how lead firms partition tasks, share resources and 10.1287/stsc.2020.0105.
develop capabilities”, Industrial Marketing Management, Suchman, M.C. (1995), “Managing legitimacy: strategic and
Vol. 40 No. 8, pp. 1224-1237. institutional approaches”, The Academy of Management
Peters, L.D., Nenonen, S., Polese, F., Frow, P. and Payne, A. Review, Vol. 20 No. 3, pp. 571-610.
(2020), “Viability mechanisms in market systems: Weick, K. (1995), Sensemaking in Organizations, Sage,
prerequisites for market shaping”, Journal of Business & Thousand Oaks, CA.
Industrial Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 9, pp. 1403-1412, doi: Widen, K., Olander, S. and Atkin, B. (2014), “Links
10.1108/JBIM-04-2019-0139. between successful innovation diffusion and stakeholder
Puska, P. (2002), “Successful prevention of non-communicable engagement”, Journal of Management in Engineering,
diseases: 25 year experiences with North Karelia Project in Vol. 30 No. 5, p. 4014018, doi: 10.1061/(asce)me.1943-
Finland”, Public Health Medicine, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 5-7, doi: 5479.0000214.
10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006070. Windahl, C., Karpen, I.O. and Wright, M.R. (2020),
Reypens, C., Lievens, A. and Blazevic, V. (2016), “Leveraging “Strategic design: orchestrating and leveraging market-
value in multi-stakeholder innovation networks: a process shaping capabilities”, Journal of Business & Industrial
framework for value co-creation and capture”, Industrial Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 9, pp. 1413-1424, doi: 10.1108/
Marketing Management, Vol. 56, pp. 40-50, doi: 10.1016/j. JBIM-03-2019-0133.
indmarman.2016.03.005. Yin, R.K. (2003), “Case study research”, Design and Methods,
Sarasvathy, S.D. and Dew, N. (2005), “New market creation Sage Publishing, Thousand Oaks, CA.
through transformation”, Journal of Evolutionary Economics,
Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 533-565.
Schiavone, F. and Simoni, M. (2019), “Strategic marketing
Further reading
approaches for the diffusion of innovation in highly regulated
industrial markets: the value of market access”, Journal of Coviello, N. and Joseph, R.M. (2012), “Creating major innovations
Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 34 No. 7, pp. 1606-1618, with customers: insights from small and young technology
doi: 10.1108/JBIM-08-2018-0232. firms”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 76 No. 6, pp. 87-104.
Storbacka, K. and Nenonen, S. (2011), “Scripting markets: Weick, K. (1976), “Educational organizations as loosely
from value propositions to market propositions”, Industrial coupled systems”, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 21
Marketing Management, Vol. 40 No. 2, pp. 255-266, doi: No. 1, pp. 1-19.
10.1016/j.indmarman.2010.06.038.
Struben, J., Lee, B.H. and Bingham, C.B. (2020), “Collective Corresponding author
action problems and resource allocation during market Anil Engez can be contacted at: anil.engez@tuni.fi

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

44