International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 344350

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Information Management

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijinfomgt

Viewpoint

Innovation drivers in retail industry

Eleonora Pantano
Department of Energetics, Mechanical and Management Engineering, University of Calabria, Via P.Bucci, cubo 46C, 87040 Arcavacata di Rende, CS, Italy

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Although in recent years research in innovation management in retail industries have increased dras-
Available online 28 March 2014 tically, most of these industries have focused only on addressing consumers acceptance of the most
effective novel systems. For these reasons, a deeper understanding is needed in three main areas: the
Keywords: innovation management approaches in retail industry, the degree of innovation heterogeneity, and the
Innovation management innovation drivers. Starting from these evidences, this paper identies to what extent there are similari-
Technology management
ties and differences in the main innovation drivers in retailing if compared to other sectors (i.e. education,
Information technology
game, etc.).
Innovation driver
Retailing 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction is spreading fast, by making available many interactive and inno-

Information technology is increasingly considered as an enabler
of business competitive advantage in addition to its contribution
to satisfy consumers demand of innovative and qualitative prod-
uct and services (Chen & Tsou, 2012; Pantano & Viassone, 2014).
Due to the large deal of research on advanced technologies and
the subsequent speed of development of new systems for sup-
porting retailers and consumers (Gunday, Ulusoy, Kilic, & Alpkan,
2008; Pantano & Viassone, 2014), retail industry is frequently sub-
ject to a disruptive innovation process that makes available a large
amount of novel information systems able to modify the traditional
organizational process. Furthermore, the novelty involved in these
technologies affects both consumers and retailers familiarity and
expertise, with consequences for the subsequent effective usage
(Pantano & Viassone, 2014). In fact, capturing value from informa-
tion technologies requires the development of new metrics and
measurement tools (Grant, Alefantos, Meyer, & Edgar, 2013).
Usually, innovation in services is characterized by non-
technological innovation and a limited effort in Research and
Development (R&D) (Trigo, 2013). For this reason, retail industries
R&D effort is mainly devoted to the development of new products
than to the development of new tools for improving the deliv-
ered services. Thus retailers are usually the adopters of innovations
produced by other manufacturing companies. In fact, retailers gen-
erally lack of innovative capacity, thus they tend to outsource all
the activities involved in R&D. Despite these conditions, the wave
of innovative technologies available for selling goods and services
Tel.: +39 0984492235; fax: +39 0984492277.
E-mail addresses: eleonora.pantano@unical.it, e.pantano@tue.nl
vative systems able to support both consumers while shopping
and retailers for achieving fast and update information on market
trends and selling process (Bennett & Savani, 2011; Fiorito, Gable,
& Conseur, 2010; Pantano & Viassone, 2014; Walter, Battiston,
Yildirim, & Schweitzer, 2012). For instance, in recent years groceries
have introduced self-service technologies equipped with radio fre-
quency identication (RFID) systems, such as the self-cash desks,
and informative touch points; electronics have introduced inter-
active displays equipped with touch screens; other stores have
introduced digital signage and applications for mobile phones; fur-
ther retail-oriented rms created completely virtual stores based
on ubiquitous computing, such as the Spanish Pickbe, which allows
consumers to access stores and products directly from their mobile
(when this is located in a certain area); another consistent part of
retailers has not introduced advanced technologies in the points
of sale yet (Pantano & Viassone, 2014). Hence, different retailers
actually show a consistent heterogeneity in innovating strategies.
Despite the still limited and discontinuous diffusion of
technology-based innovations in retail industry, other industries
already introduced more advanced and sophisticated systems. For
instance, game industry is largely paying attention to the devel-
opment of the best haptic technologies and applications, virtual
and augmented reality enriched scenarios, multimodal interac-
tion (i.e. new input devices invisible to humans for enhancing the
realism of the environment, such as the motion capture systems),
interactive digital storytelling systems, customizable interfaces for
increasing the level of excitement and enjoyment (Hamam, Eid, &
El Saddik, 2013; Lai & Wang, 2012). Similarly, the education indus-
try is currently oriented to the development of digital storytelling,
virtual and augmented enriched scenarios, and collaborative 3D
environments for enhancing the effectiveness of learning (Adamo,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2014.03.002
0268-4012/ 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 E. Pantano / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 344350
Bertacchini, Bilotta, Pantano, & Tavernise, 2010; Noguera, Jimenez,
& Osuna-Perez, 2013). While tourism and hospitality industry is
exploiting the most recent advances in 3D graphics, communica-
tion technologies (such as ubiquitous computing and new systems
for increasing the quality of connectivity and data interchange), and
geographical identifying systems for promoting tourism destina-
tion in a global perspective and attracting more visitors (Lin et al.,
2013; Martinez-Grana, Goy, & Cimarra, 2013; Noguera, Barranco,
Segura, & Martinez, 2012).
The purpose of this study is to provide a deeper understanding
of the causes of a different level of innovation adoption and diffu-
sion in retailing if compared to other sectors, while identifying the
drivers that push retailers to innovate.
The paper is organized as follows: the rst part is devoted to the
innovation drivers emerging in other sectors such as manufactur-
ing, while the following sections focus on innovation management
in retail industry, with emphasis on the current approaches, theo-
ries and determinants, for underlying some lines of inquires and a
research agenda.
2. Plurality of innovation drivers: evidence from recent
studies
Organization might achieve a series of benets from introducing
information technologies, which need to be adopted through differ-
ent practice (Ashurst, Freer, Ekdahl, & Gibbons, 2012). The adoption
strategies are solicited by several components within the organi-
zation, such as innovation, market orientation, etc. In this paper
we want to understand the main factors inuencing the informa-
tion technologies adoption in retailing, starting from the innovation
drivers carried out in other sectors. For instance, innovativeness
represents a new and nonnancial measure for evaluating organi-
zational performance, and understanding rms reaction to market
changes (such as the speed of reaction to changes in the market,
etc.) (Moos, Beimborn, Wagner, & Weitzel, 2010). Thus, it is strictly
linked to rms ability to adopt and implement innovations, from
both a product and service perspective.
Some past studies pointed out also the role of market orienta-
tion and entrepreneurial innovativeness (including demand factors
such consumers requirements and individual-CEO characteristics)
as innovation drivers in manufacturing/production sector (Boso,
Cadogan, & Story, 2012; Hameed, Counsell, & Swift, 2012), whereas
other ones outlined the important role of organizational charac-
teristics (i.e. dynamic capabilities, nancial resources including
equity capital and external nancing, rm size and age) (Ashurst
et al., 2012; Ellonen, Wikstrom, & Jantunen, 2009; Gunday et al.,
2008; Hameed et al., 2012; Plessis, 2008). Market orientation is
based on three main activities: generation of market intelligence
(for understanding and predicting future consumers needs and
behaviours), dissemination of intelligence across organizational
functions (distribution of gathered information across depart-
ments), and organizationwide responsiveness to such information
(Kohli & Jaworski, 1990; Lewrick, Omar, & Williams, 2011; Sandvik
& Sandvik, 2003). Similarly, it consists of consumer orientation
(focus on consumers behaviour), competitor orientation (focus on
competitors strategies) and inter-functional coordination (Lewrick
et al., 2011). While entrepreneurial innovativeness refers to rms
ability to innovate, and it is linked to the capacity to adopt an inno-
vation before the competitors (Gunday et al., 2008; Marcati, Guido,
& Peluso, 2008). It is further triggered by entrepreneurs innova-
tiveness, with specic regard to his/her personality in terms of
openness to novelty and willingness to be the rst adopter in a spe-
cic domain (Marcati et al., 2008). In particular, this emphasizes the
role of human capital in the innovation propensity (Parrilli & Elola,
2012), by encouraging new ideas for improving existing processes
345
(Manley & McFallan, 2006). The role of entrepreneurs innovative-
ness is marked especially in the case of small-medium enterprises
(SME), where the gure of CEO and entrepreneur coincide in one
person. Usually, big companies have more nancial resources if
compared to SMEs, which have also limited capacities of Research
and Development and technical skills, and are more focused on the
technology and market uncertainty and risk that may affect neg-
atively their cash ow (Lofqvist, 2012). As a consequence, rms
size and age may play an important role on the emerging ability to
innovate.
Moreover, extant literature shows some links between organi-
zational characteristics, such as dynamic capabilities and ability of
innovating (Chen, 2010), by including capability to react to envi-
ronmental change (Teece, Pisano, & Shuen, 1997; Verona & Ravasi,
2003). The adjective dynamic refers to the ability to perceive
environmental changes and to behave consequently, by renewing
competencies; whereas the term capabilities emphasizes the role
of strategic management in the process of integrating and recong-
uring internal and external organizational skills and competencies
for the innovation goal (Wang, Lin, & Luarn, 2006). In fact, they lie
in (i) the rms ability of perceiving environmental changes (for
rapidly recognizing the challenges and the opportunities of the
changes in the competitive scenario and to subsequent modify the
strategies), (ii) the organizational learning (the continuous learning
process that allows acquiring explicit and tacit knowledge to trans-
fer into competitive advantages, by constantly learning to adapt to
fast changes in the environment), (iii) the resource assignment and
integration, and (iv) the value chain assignment and integration
(Teece et al., 1997; Wang & Wu, 2010). Thus, these capabilities
are able to reduce the innovation failure risk, by adjusting and
correcting the actual strategies based on the organizational and
managerial competences (Teece et al., 1997).
In addition, recent works identied the continuous progresses in
science and technology (technology push) as further strong drivers
(Pantano & Viassone, 2014; Parrilli & Elola, 2012), by providing a
huge number of advanced systems able to enhance several organi-
zational processes. Table 1 summarizes the main drivers emerging
across the different industries.
Interest towards innovation studies has increased fast also in
several industries beyond manufacturing (Trigo, 2013), thus sec-
tors characterized by a low focus on technology and on R&D
effort have been strongly acknowledged (Trigo, 2013). Since
retail-oriented rms operate in a high competitive and uncer-
tain environment, a deeper understanding of retailers ability to
innovate for successfully competing plays a key role for achieving
business protability. Although past studies identied innovation
as a concept related exclusively to R&D efforts and number of
patents, subsequent research demonstrated the existence of impor-
tant innovative activities in services distinct from manufacturing
innovation (Mothe & Nguyen-Thi, 2013; Vence & Trigo, 2009),
thus the presence of a plurality of new technologies aiming at
innovating and enhancing also retail process prompts to recon-
sider innovation management and innovation drivers also in retail
industry.
3. Recent approaches to innovation management in
retailing
As anticipated, retailers are mainly innovation adopters than
developers. They are more interested in selling activities, while
the advanced technologies should enhance the service deliver-
ing process. Hence, retailing can be viewed as a service-oriented
industry subject to continuous innovations. As service related pro-
cesses, the involvement of consumers may increase the quality
of provided service, by adding clients interactions to the set of
346 E. Pantano / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 344350
Table 1
Main drivers emerging across different industries.
Drivers Meaning
Market orientation It is based on three main activities:
generation of market intelligence,
dissemination of the intelligence across
organizational functions, and
organizationwide responsiveness to this
information. It consists of consumer
orientation and inter-functional
coordination.
Entrepreneurial innovativeness It represents rms ability to innovate, and it
is linked to the capacity to adopt an
innovation before the competitors.
Human capital It concerns employees and CEO, in terms of
openness to novelty, willingness to be the
rst adopter in a specic domain and
propensity to engage new ideas for
improving organizational processes.
Organizational characteristics Dynamic capabilities (they lie in the rms
ability of perceiving environmental changes
and consequently reacting), nancial
resources, rm size and age
Progresses in technology Continuous progresses in science and
technology (technology push) provide a huge
number of advanced systems able to enhance
several organizational processes.
key resources as main factors in the service design (Chen & Tsou,
2012). For this reason, consumers acceptance of new technolo-
gies, in terms of attitude, behavioural intention and effective usage
of the systems is a critical variable for technology selection and
adoption. Other critical factors involved in the technology intro-
duction may focus on the amount of monetary investment and
obsolescence risk of the technical components of the adopted inno-
vative system (Pantano, Iazzolino, & Migliano, 2013; Shim & Lee,
2011). To reduce the uncertainty encountered while innovating,
retailers may employ different tools and approaches. For instance,
Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) is a useful tool for identifying the
involved risks, by identifying the potential source of risks (starting
from a root node representing a generic risk) and splitting this one
into layers of increasing detail (Hillson, 2002; Pantano et al., 2013).
While for the effective risk estimation, the probability-impact grid
is preferred (Ward, 1999), which rates the risk value according to
the probability of occurrence and its impact. Furthermore, Pantano
and colleagues (2013) proposed a new graphic tool based on the
analysis of the interdependences among risks, in order to identify
if the importance of a risk increases according to the high impact
of other risks.
Due to the large amount of technology-based innovations,
innovation management is strictly linked to the technology man-
agement concept, by pushing research on focusing on how to
design, develop and introduce an innovation based on new
progresses in technology. In fact, the innovation management
perspective in retailing is strictly linked to the management of
advanced technologies introduced in the points of sale, which
enhanced the process from several viewpoints (i.e. clients, ven-
dors, retailers, etc.), and can be investigated through different
approaches (i.e. acceptance models, ethnography, usability, etc.).
3.1. Innovation adoption in retailing: theories and determinants
Retailers introduced advanced technologies by mainly question-
ing to what extent consumers would make an extensive usage of
these ones, as well as to what extent managers would achieve
detailed data for predicting the future market trends. For this rea-
son, an important line of inquiry focused more on consumers
Industry Reference
Manufacturing/new Boso et al. (2012), Fortuin and Omta
product development, food (2009), Hameed et al. (2012), Kohli and
processing Jaworski (1990), Lewrick et al. (2011),
Rhee, Park, and Lee (2010) and Sandvik
and Sandvik (2003)
Manufacturing/new Boso et al. (2012), Gunday et al. (2008),
product development Hameed et al. (2012) and Marcati et al.
(2008)
Research & development Manley and McFallan (2006), Marcati
(R&D), construction et al. (2008) and Parrilli and Elola
industry (2012)
Manufacturing, R&D Ellonen et al. (2009), Gunday et al.
(2008), Hameed et al. (2012) and Rhee
et al. (2010)
R&D Pantano and Viassone (2014) and
Parrilli and Elola (2012)
acceptance of these advanced systems than on their effective devel-
opment or on retailers and employees adoption.
Acceptance has been extensively investigated through the Tech-
nology Acceptance Model (TAM), which has been developed with
the initial purpose to predict Internet usage behaviour, on the
base of four main constructs: perceived ease of use, perceived
usefulness, attitude, and behavioural intention (Davis, 1989). In
particular, perceived ease of use is related to the degree to which
a subject believes that using a certain system will not require
any effort; perceived usefulness is the degree to which a subject
believes that using a certain system will enhance his/her perfor-
mance; both these constructs have an effect on the attitude that
represents subject assessment towards the system, and the sub-
sequent behavioural intention (the degree to which the subject
is willing to use a certain system) (Pantano & Di Pietro, 2012;
Venkatesh, Morris, Davis, & Davis, 2003; Venkatesh, Thong, & Xu,
2012). TAM has been developed from the Theory of Reasoned
Action (TRA) (Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975), which states that human
behavioural intention may depend on his/her attitude towards a
certain behaviour and the subjective norms (expectations of oth-
ers towards performing a certain behaviour, thus they represent to
what extent a subject is inuenced by others perception of his/her
behaviour).
A common attempt to investigate innovation strategies in retail-
ing refers to the investigation of consumers acceptance of specic
technologies, such as self-service technologies (Lee, Fairhurst, &
Lee, 2009; Lin & Chang, 2011; Lee & Yang, 2013; Schuster, Drennan,
& Lings, 2013), radio frequency identication (RFID) (Kowatesh &
Maass, 2010; Muller-Seitz, Dautzenberg, Creusen, & Stromereder,
2009; Rothensee & Spiekermann, 2008), recommendation systems
(Kohler, Fueller, Stieger, & Matzler, 2011; Kowatesh & Maass, 2010;
Ku & Tai, 2013), mobile applications (Chong, 2013; Schierz, Schilke,
& Wirtz, 2010; Wang et al., 2006), etc., by adding several constructs
to the traditional ones previously identied in the TAM, such as
social inuences (inuences by reference groups such as family,
colleagues and supervisors), perceived risk (uncertainty involved
in the usage of a certain technology), trust (a psychological state
involving the acceptance of the vulnerability of a positive expec-
tation or a certain behaviour), perceived enjoyment (the degree to
 E. Pantano / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 344350
which a subject believes that a certain technology is pleasant), etc.
(Pantano & Di Pietro, 2012; Venkatesh et al., 2003, 2012). Therefore,
despite the different technologies investigated, past studies used
the common approach of TAM, by developing extended models that
incorporate more variables able to explain better the motivations
to adopt a certain technology. In this wide scenario, Pantano and Di
Pietro (2012) grouped the extensive range of possible constructs
into four main categories: safety and cost of the technology (i.e.
privacy concerns, etc.), consumers personal traits (i.e. user inno-
vativeness and disposition to novelty, experience with advanced
systems, etc.), social pressure (i.e. word-of-mouth communication,
number of friends using a certain system, etc.) towards the usage
of a certain technology and its hedonic value (i.e. perceived enjoy-
ment).
Another approach to innovation management for retailing
consists of involving consumers in the new product/service devel-
opment process for improving the acceptance of the nal outcome
and the quality level of the emerging result, with benets for com-
petitive advantages (Chandra & Leenders, 2012; Greer & Lei, 2012).
For instance, Alexander, Nell, Bailey, and Shaw (2009) highlighted
out the critical role of consumers in the development of new retail
format in England; whereas Fujioka (2009) identied the funda-
mental steps for the success of this process: (i) recognition of a point
of contact between consumer and retailer, (ii) starting of the inter-
action between these two gures, by building a strong relationship,
and (iii) retailers reaction towards the consumer viewpoint.
While retailers understood the importance of consumers in the
process, consumers awareness towards their role in the process
is still limited (Andreu, Sanchez, & Mele, 2010). For this reason,
a large deal of current studies focuses on the best strategies for
enhancing consumers active participation in the co-creation pro-
cess and extracting their knowledge from these interactions to be
transformed into new products/services, by also exploiting new
internet-based tools, such as social media (Greer & Lei, 2012; Kohler
et al., 2011; Sawhney, Verona, & Prandelli, 2005).
3.2. Heterogeneity of adopted innovations
As anticipated, the innovation diffusion among retailers is still
limited. Few retailers introduced innovations in the points of sale,
whereas a huge variety of technologies for different product typolo-
gies emerges among the ones who already adopted new systems.
The most diffused technologies are self-service technologies, digital
signage, mobile applications and ubiquitous computing (Pantano
& Viassone, 2014). Digital signage has been mainly employed for
enriching and making more attractive storefront windows. It is
based on large screens showing advertising able to inuence con-
sumers behaviour (Dennis, Newman, Michon, Brakus, & Wright,
2010; Kim, 2012; Park, Kim, & del Pobil, 2011). For instance, some
luxury brands, such as Christian Louboutin, introduced in some
selected stores large screens projecting humans wearing the prod-
ucts substituting physical mannequins in the storefront windows;
these technologies require a huge investment in the hardware part
with a high threat of substitution by new and more efcient screens.
Kate Spade introduced in some selected storefronts an interac-
tive touch point where users can access the online store and buy
items also out of the store opening hours (see Kate Spade Saturday
project in New York), to integrate the advantage of e-commerce
(24/7 openings) and ofine stores (the possibility to really see and
touch the item); in this case, both the hardware part consisting of
the interactive screen and the software based on databases con-
taining the available items and consumers proles need constant
updates and continuous investments. Similarly, Luxottica proposed
the Eye Candy vending machine, which allows clients to virtually
try sunglasses and purchase their favourite ones through a (physi-
cal) self-service machine equipped with a touch screen system (in
347
this case the service is available 24/7). This technology exploits
the advantages of self-service systems based on interactive touch
screen displays, which support consumers interaction with prod-
ucts. For this reason, they are extensively used by large department
stores and groceries (e.g. Ikea, Carrefour) for enhancing the ser-
vices that consumers are able to deliver by themselves without
the direct employees assistance (Hung, Yen, & Ou, 2012; Pantano
& Di Pietro, 2012). In fact, these kinds of stores largely adopted
automatic cash desks that allow consumers to self-checkout, with
benets for time saving and queues reducing. Recently, also some
fashion brands, like American Apparel, introduced self-service sys-
tems for self-design and self-creation of own t-shirt. In particular,
this company introduced in Boxpark (one of the largest shopping
centre in London, UK) the possibility to design a new t-shirt through
an interactive screen, and subsequently pay and print it.
Novel mobile applications have been further introduced by
retailers with the function of communicating news, promotions and
advertising, store locator (e.g. nding the closest store to the users
geographical position), and of creating and managing a wish list for
easily nd products in the store and calculate the total amount of
purchase on real time. For instance, the luxury brand Tiffany devel-
oped a free mobile application that offers the possibility to choose
the favourite ring, virtually try it, share the item through social
networks, dene a date of engagement and share the news, and
book a visit in the closest store for really trying the ring. Whereas
other rms, such as Ikea, offer a smart catalogue based on a mobile
application that supports the interaction between consumers and
the print catalogue.
In addition, totally new (small-size) companies have been
founded for exploiting the benets of ubiquitous computing,
consisting of constant network accessibility, consumers mobile
connectivity, and geographical position identier systems. In this
way, a new ubiquitous retail scenario emerges as a distributed
store where retailer is able to offer items without the physical
store constraints (Bennett & Savani, 2011; Kourouthanassis, Giaglis,
& Vrechopoulos, 2007; Pantano & Viassone, 2014). A meaningful
example is the case of Pickbe, a Spanish small enterprise that allows
consumers to buy products at metro stop in Barcelona, by focus-
ing the mobile camera on the tag (QR code) corresponding to the
item of interest, virtually showed on the wall. Since this system is
based on consumers own technology (smartphone), rms invest-
ment mainly includes the software (including databases, intelligent
systems for matching products, consumers requests, etc.), thus
nancial resources do not represent a limitation for the choice to
invest in innovations for the points of sale and also small rms are
able to develop in this direction.
Past studies on consumers acceptance of technology-based
innovations for retailing showed to what extent buyers are willing
to use these innovative systems, with benets for their shopping
experience, satisfaction and loyalty (Kohler et al., 2011; Ku & Tai,
2013; Muller-Seitz et al., 2009; Pantano & Di Pietro, 2012).
Table 2 synthetizes the most used technologies, the number of
adopters (number of retailers who already introduced the technol-
ogy), the amount of investment (specifying if it is mainly devoted
to software or hardware) and the typology of adopters (i.e. big
retailers, luxury retailers, etc.).
3.3. Emerging innovation drivers for retailing
Our analysis showed to what extent the innovation manage-
ment in retailing lays on the intersection between different areas
of research, such as marketing, technology management, computer
science and psychology. It is possible to identify and evaluate inno-
vation drivers in retail industry, by taking into account the current
knowledge of innovation phenomenon in this specic sector, from
different sides.
348 E. Pantano / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 344350

Table 2
Innovation diffusion in retail industry.

Technology Number of adopters Amount of investment Typology of adopters

Digital signage Medium Medium (mainly in Fashion industry (i.e.

hardware) luxury brands)
Self-service technologies High Medium (mainly in Groceries and department
hardware) stores
Mobile apps High Low (mainly in software) Both small-medium
retailers and large retailers,
both luxury brands and
low cost ones, etc.
Ubiquitous stores Low Low (mainly in software) Small and frequently
ad-hoc enterprises

Table 3
Summary of ndings from cross-retailer analysis.

Retailers Innovation Level of exploitation Role of innovation

Fashion Digital signage Medium Informative (providing

consumers information)
Groceries and (large) department stores Self-service technologies High Providing new services for
consumers
(Large) department stores Self-service technologies High Providing new services for
and mobile apps consumers
Ad-hoc new retailers Ubiquitous computing Low Creating new services for
consumers, reducing the
number of employees,
managing data on market
trends

Stores that introduced innovations provided a range of insights
into how the different retailers are succeeding with innovation.
Table 3 summarizes the ndings achieved from the analysis of
actual innovation diffusion among retailers.
4. Discussion
In this paper, we considered some examples of the most adopted
innovations in retailing. Noteworthy consideration relates to the
number of retailers that show either no or limited involvement
in innovating. Starting from the main functions of the informa-
tion technologies-enabled innovations and taking into account that
organizational factors like size and age of the retailer do not inu-
ence the ability to innovate (i.e. the availability of not expensive
technologies allows also small retailers to innovate), we identied
three main innovation drivers in retail industry: (i) (consumers)
demand for innovating, (ii) availability of new technology-based
tools for investigating market, (iii) uncertainty in adopting innova-
tions.
4.1. Demand of innovating
Especially youth showed a large interest in new technologies for
supporting purchasing decision, such as interactive tools for com-
paring, searching and tasting/trying products, or reducing in-store
waiting time and queues (Pantano & Viassone, 2014). Moreover,
these systems are able to attract also that part of population less
interested in shopping activities, such as male cohorts.
The heterogeneity of adopted systems delivers further stimuli
for soliciting consumers interest, by proposing exciting and novel
sensorial experiences able to communicate products and brands
with innovative and more efcient tools, i.e. touch screen displays
with interactive functionality, haptic technologies for increasing
human-computer interaction (enhancing the realism of interac-
tion), speed of response towards consumers requests, etc.
A critical issue is related to the privacy concerns that may reduce
users behavioural intention. Moreover, the ability to offer pre-
cise technology-based innovation tting consumers interest is also
linked to a well-developed capacity to deeply understand and pre-
dict market trends.
4.2. Availability of new advanced technology-based tools for
investigating market

As discussed in the previous sections, research with consumers
indicated their increasing demand of innovation in the point of
sale (Chen & Tsou, 2012; Pantano & Viassone, 2014). Past studies
showed to what extent consumers desire to live more engaging
experiences while shopping. This means that they expect to nd
both entertaining elements and supporting tools able to enhance
the quality of the shopping experience, as well as to increase their
empowerment. Possibility of successfully innovating in the points
of sale has been extended by the recent advances in technologies,
which make available a huge number of systems with different
monetary investments and benets. As emerged in previous works,
integration of virtual and augmented reality, social networks and
mobile technologies is evolving as a promising area for captur-
ing consumers attention and inuencing their purchasing decision
(Dennis et al., 2010; Fiorito et al., 2010; Kim, 2012; Kohler et al.,
2011; Kourouthanassis et al., 2007; Shim & Lee, 2011).
The capacity to understand market and predict future trends
is a critical issue, as it was been argued that rms capabilities
to fast perceive and react to environmental change is a funda-
mental factor for innovating (Teece et al., 1997; Verona & Ravasi,
2003; Wang et al., 2006). Advanced technologies provide bene-
ts for achieving this task (Bennett & Savani, 2011; Fiorito et al.,
2010; Pantano & Viassone, 2014; Walter et al., 2012). In fact, they
provide updated information on consumers behaviours, in terms
of both purchases and accessed products (such technologies are
able to memorize also the visualized products which consumers
did not purchase). These data are collected in particular databases
integrated with informative systems that support the access to
consumercomputer interactions for extracting knowledge to be
used for developing customized selling strategies and advertising,
as well as to understand factors inuencing consumers decision-
making process. Hence, retailers might easily explore market
 E. Pantano / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 344350
trends by interrogating the systems and dening the best strat-
egy according to the emerging insights. For instance, fuzzy-logic
and ad-hoc agent-based simulators allow for deeply understanding
market and consequently reacting, by predicting clients behaviour
from the historical data (past behaviours). The quality of the results
and the ability to understand the insights will require constant
updated technologies. To achieve this goal, retailers are prompted
to employ novel software able to match consumers, trends and
future strategies, with benets for the competitive advantage.
4.3. Uncertainty in adopting innovations
The amount of investment may limit the capacity to invest and
innovate of several rms. In fact, each technology for retailing may
involve a certain level of risk and uncertainty that the current
tools may only partially reduce (Hillson, 2002; Pantano et al., 2013;
Rothensee & Spiekermann, 2008). The recent advances in technol-
ogy developed also systems that do not require huge monetary
investments, such as the mobile applications, mainly consisting
of a software available for consumers own smartphone. Hence,
retailer need a limited investment if compared to technologies
based on large and interactive screens like digital signage, touch
points in storefront windows etc. Although this economic compo-
nent may be an incentive for small retailers, also luxury brands
and huge retailers adopted mobile technologies for attracting their
consumers, such as Tiffany. For these reasons, the uncertainty of
consumers reaction emerges as the most signicant restraining
force. Furthermore, a still scarce number of current studies analysed
also employees acceptance of technology adopted by retailers. Lit-
erature indicates that rms are largely using extended Technology
Acceptance Models (TAM) to shape new systems and predict the
effective consumers usage (Kohler et al., 2011; Pantano & Di Pietro,
2012; Schierz et al., 2010; Shim & Lee, 2011; Venkatesh et al., 2012),
but little is known about frontline employees acceptance of these
systems. In addition, a new question arises from this scenario: is
TAM still enough for effectively predicting the return on investment
of the technology? In fact, the current extended TAM models are
not able to state which is the best technology to invest in, or which
is the best following strategy in terms of being adopters or pioneers.
Thus, this represents a promising area for further investigations.
5. Conclusions
The study of innovation in retailing has traditionally focused
mainly on the prediction of consumers acceptance of a new service
technology, because retailers were simply considered users of the
innovation developed by others. This paper contributes to literature
by providing insights in the current innovating trend in retailing,
by deeply analysing the context and identifying the possible inno-
vation drivers that explain this situation.
Although retail-oriented rms are usually not associated with
being pioneers with innovative technologies, some retailers are
largely exploiting existing technology to improve selling efciency,
as well as adopting innovation that enhances the whole retail pro-
cess including the communication across the actors involved in the
process.
From the broader literature, the current competitive scenario
emerges as characterized by frequent changes and turbulence.
Thus, retailers ability to predict trends is a key issue for success.
Advanced technology may support rms in extracting knowledge
from clients, and attracting and maintaining existing ones.
After identied a high level of heterogeneity in retail industry,
we synthesized three main innovation drivers that push innova-
tion in this sector, which reect insights from different recent
interdisciplinary research streams. In fact, our analysis highlighted
349
increasing demand for innovating, advanced technology-based
tools for investigating market, and uncertainty in adopting inno-
vations as the major elements inuencing the innovation in retail
domain. Thus, a question for future research is how such changes
can be accomplished quickly enough to meet market expectations.
There is also another open question about retailers adoption strat-
egy, the timing of adoption. When does retailer should be pioneer
and when adopter?
Pioneering can be achieved by adopting a new technology as
the rst-move, by soliciting the demand of innovation for their
new service and continuing satisfying the past demand before other
competitors offer the same technology. In opposite, adopting aims
at maximizing the late-move advantages. When technology pushes
and demand pulls, the competitive scenario requires signicant
R&D effort. Hence, the successful strategy will lay on retailers abil-
ity to assume risks and reduce uncertainty, by developing new
models able to integrate prediction of consumers acceptance and
usage of new systems, amount of investment, benets for retailers
and return on investment in terms of number of consumers, quality
and quantity of achieved data, as well as of the monetary resources
needed. Although this question still needs to be examined, another
critical issue concerns the way to be a good-follower emerging from
the increasing consumers demand of innovating in the points of
sale. It is possible to predict that also traditional points of sale need
to integrate some new technologies at least for maintaining exist-
ing clients, who may prefer more exciting retailers offering new
shopping experiences.
References
Adamo, A., Bertacchini, P. A., Bilotta, E., Pantano, P., & Tavernise, A. (2010). Connecting
art and science for education: Learning through an advanced virtual theatre with
talking heads. Leonardo, 43(5), 442448.
Alexander, A., Nell, D., Bailey, A. R., & Shaw, G. (2009). The co-creation of a retail
innovation: Shoppers and the early supermarket in Britain. Enterprise & Society,
10(3), 529558.
Andreu, L., Sanchez, I., & Mele, C. (2010). Value co-creation among retailers and con-
sumers: new insights into the furniture market. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 17(4), 241250.
Ashurst, C., Freer, A., Ekdahl, J., & Gibbons, C. (2012). Exploring IT-enabled innova-
tion: A new paradigm? International Journal of Information Management, 31(4),
326336.
Bennett, R., & Savani, S. (2011). Retailers preparedness for introduction of third wave
(ubiquitous) computing applications: A survey of UK companies. International
Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 39(5), 306325.
Boso, N., Cadogan, J. W., & Story, V. M. (2012). Entrepreneurial orientation and market
orientation as drivers of product innovation success: A study of exporters from
a developing economy. International Small Business Journal, 31(1), 5781.
Chandra, Y., & Leenders, M. A. A. M. (2012). User innovation and entrepreneurship
in the virtual world: A study of Second Life residents. Technovation, 32(7-8),
464476.
Chen, B. (2010). An empirical study on rm dynamic capabilities inuencing inno-
vation performance. In Proceedings of the international conference on information
management Innovation Management and Industrial Engineering, IEEE, (pp.
651654).
Chen, J.-S., & Tsou, H.-T. (2012). Performance effects of IT capability, service process
innovation, and the mediating role of customer service. Journal of Engineering
and Technology Management, 29, 7194.
Chong, A. Y. L. (2013). Mobile commerce usage activities: The roles of demographic
and motivation variables. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 80(7),
13501359.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance
of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319340.
Dennis, C., Newman, A., Michon, R., Brakus, J. J., & Wright, T. L. (2010). The mediating
effects of perception and emotion: Digital signage in mall atmospherics. Journal
of Retailing and Consumer Services, 17(3), 205215.
Ellonen, H.-K., Wikstrom, P., & Jantunen, A. (2009). Linking dynamic-capability port-
folios and innovation outcomes. Technovation, 29, 753762.
Fiorito, S. S., Gable, M., & Conseur, A. (2010). Technology: Advancing retail buyer per-
formance in the twenty-rst century. International Journal of Retail & Distribution
Management, 38(11/12), 879893.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction
to theory and research. Addison-Wesley, MA: Reading.
Fujioka, Y. (2009). A consideration of the process of co-creation of value with cus-
tomers. Articial Life Robotics, 14, 101103.
Fortuin, F. T. J. M., & Omta, S. W. F. (2009). Innovation drivers and barriers in food
processing. British Food Journal, 111(8), 839851.
350 E. Pantano / International Journal of Information Management 34 (2014) 344350
Grant, K., Alefantos, T., Meyer, M., & Edgar, D. (2013). Capturing and measuring
technology based service innovationA case analysis theory and practice. Inter-
national Journal of Information Management, 33(5), 899905.
Greer, C. R., & Lei, D. (2012). Collaborative innovation with customers: A review
of the literature and suggestions for future research. International Journal of
Management Reviews, 14, 6384.
Gunday, G., Ulusoy, G., Kilic, K., & Alpkan, L. (2008). Modelling innovation: Deter-
minants of innovativeness and the impact of innovation on rm performance.
In Proceedings of the international conference on management of innovation and
technology IEEE, (pp. 766771).
Hamam, A., Eid, M., & El Saddik, A. (2013). Effect of kinaesthetic and tactile haptic
feedback on the quality of experience of edutainment applications. Multimedia
Tools and Applications, 67(2), 455472.
Hameed, M. A., Counsell, S., & Swift, S. (2012). A conceptual model for the pro-
cess of IT innovation adoption in organizations. Journal of Engineering Technology
Management, 29, 358390.
Hillson, D. A. (2002). The Risk Breakdown Structure (RBS) as an aid to effective risk
management. In Proceedings of the PMI European Project Management Conference.
Hung, C. S., Yen, D. C., & Ou, C. S. (2012). An empirical study of the relationship
between a self-service technology investment and rm nancial performance.
Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 29, 6270.
Kim, J. S. (2012). A study of contact frequency and consumer preference for digital
signage advertisement. Communications in Computers and Information Science,
338, 181187.
Kohler, T., Fueller, J., Stieger, D., & Matzler, K. (2011). Avatar-based innovation: Con-
sequences of the virtual co-creation experience. Computers in Human Behaviour,
27, 160168.
Kohli, A. K., & Jaworski, B. J. (1990). Marketing orientation: The construct,
research proposition, and managerial implications. Journal of Marketing, 54,
118.
Kourouthanassis, P. E., Giaglis, G. M., & Vrechopoulos, A. P. (2007). Enhancing user
experience through pervasive information systems: The case of pervasive retail-
ing. International Journal of Information Management, 27, 319335.
Kowatesh, T., & Maass, W. (2010). In-store consumer behaviour: How mobile rec-
ommendation agents inuence usage intentions, product purchases, and store
preferences. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(4), 697704.
Ku, Y.-C., & Tai, Y.-M. (2013). What happens when recommendation system meets
reputation system? The impact of recommendation information on purchase
intention. In Proceedings of the Annual Hawaii International Conference on System
Sciences (pp. 13761383).
Lai, C.-L., & Wang, C.-L. (2012). Mobile edutainment with interactive augmented real-
ity using adaptive marker tracking. In Proceedings of the international conference
on parallel and distributed systems IEEE, (pp. 124131).
Lee, H.-J., Fairhurst, A. E., & Lee, M.-Y. (2009). The importance of self-service kiosks
in developing consumers retail patronage intentions. Managing Service Quality,
19(6), 687701.
Lee, H.-J., & Yang, K. (2013). Interpersonal service quality, self-service technology
(SST) service quality, and retail patronage. Journal of Retailing and Consumer
Services, 20(1), 5157.
Lewrick, M., Omar, M., & Williams, R. L., Jr. (2011). Market orientation and innovators
success: An exploration of the inuence of customer and competitor orientation.
Journal of Technology Management & Innovation, 6(3), 4862.
Lin, B.-S. P., Tsai, W.-H., Wu, C. C., Hsu, P. H., Huang, J. Y., & Liu, T. H. (2013). The
design of cloud-based 4G/LTE for mobile augmented reality with smart mobile
devices. In Proceedings of the international symposium on service-oriented system
engineering IEEE, (pp. 561566).
Lin, J.-S. C., & Chang, H.-C. (2011). The role of technology readiness in self-service
technology acceptance. Managing Service Quality, 21(4), 424444.
Lofqvist, L. (2012). Motivation for innovation in small enterprises. International Jour-
nal of Technology Management, 60(3/4), 242265.
Manley, K., & Mcfallan, S. (2006). Exploring the drivers of rm-level innovation
in the construction industry. Construction Management and Economics, 24(9),
911920.
Marcati, A., Guido, G., & Peluso, A. M. (2008). The role of SME entrepreneurs inno-
vativeness and personality in the adoption of innovations. Research Policy, 37,
15791590.
Martinez-Grana, A. M., Goy, J. L., & Cimarra, C. A. (2013). A virtual tour of geological
heritage: Valurising geodiversity using google earth and QR code. Computers and
Geosciences, 61, 8393.
Moos, B., Beimborn, D., Wagner, H.-T., & Weitzel, T. (2010). Suggestions for mea-
suring organizational innovativeness: A review. In Proceedings of the Hawaii
international conference on system sciences IEEE, (pp. 110).
Mothe, C., & Nguyen-Thi, T. U. (2013). Sources of information for organizational
innovation: A sector comparative approach. International Journal of Technology
Management, 63(1/2), 125144.
Muller-Seitz, G., Dautzenberg, K., Creusen, U., & Stromereder, C. (2009). Customer
acceptance of RFID technology: Evidence from the German electronic retail sec-
tor. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16(1), 3139.
Noguera, J. M., Barranco, M. J., Segura, R. J., & Martinez, L. (2012). A mobile 3D-
GIS hybrid recommender system for tourism. Information Sciences, 215(15),
3752.
Noguera, J. M., Jimenez, J. J., & Osuna-Perez, M. C. (2013). Development and evalua-
tion of a 3D mobile application for learning manual therapy in the physiotherapy
laboratory. Computers & Education, 69, 96108.
Pantano, E., & Di Pietro, L. (2012). Understanding consumers acceptance of
technology-based innovations in retailing. Journal of Technology Management
& Innovation, 7(4), 119.
Pantano, E., Iazzolino, G., & Migliano, G. (2013). Obsolescence risk in advanced
technologies for retailing: A management perspective. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 20(1), 225233.
Pantano, E., & Viassone, M. (2014). Demand pull and technology push perspective
in technology-based innovations for the points of sale: The retailers evaluation.
Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 21(1), 4147.
Park, E., Kim, S., & del Pobil, A. P. (2011). Can I go there?: The effects of digital sig-
nage on psychology of waynding users. Journal of Next Generation Information
Technology, 2(4), 4758.
Parrilli, M. D., & Elola, A. (2012). The strength of science and technology drivers for
SME innovation. Small Business Economics, 39, 897907.
du Plessis, M. (2008). The strategic drivers and objectives of communities of practice
as vehicles for knowledge management in small and medium enterprises. Inter-
national Journal of Information Management, 28(1), 6167.
Rhee, J., Park, T., & Lee, D. H. (2010). Drivers of innovativeness and performance for
innovative SMEs in South Korea: Mediation of learning orientation. Technova-
tion, 30(1), 6575.
Rothensee, M., & Spiekermann, S. (2008). Between extreme rejection and cautious
acceptance: Consumers reaction to RFID-based IS in retail. Social Science Com-
puter Review, 26(1), 7586.
Sandvik, I. L., & Sandvik, K. (2003). The impact of market orientation on product
innovativeness and business performance. International Journal of Research in
Marketing, 20, 355376.
Sawhney, M., Verona, G., & Prandelli, E. (2005). Collaborating to create: For cus-
tomer engagement in product innovation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 19(4),
417.
Schierz, P. G., Schilke, O., & Wirtz, B. W. (2010). Understanding consumer acceptance
of mobile payment services: An empirical analysis. Electronic Commerce Research
and Applications, 9(3), 209216.
Schuster, L., Drennan, J., & Lings, I. N. (2013). Consumer acceptance of m-wellbeing
services: A social marketing perspective. European Journal of Marketing, 47(9),
14391457.
Shim, S. I., & Lee, Y. (2011). Consumers perceived risk reduction by 3D virtual model.
International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management, 39(12), 945959.
Teece, D. J., Pisano, G., & Shuen, A. (1997). Dynamic capabilities and strategic man-
agement. Strategic Management Journal, 18(7), 509533.
Trigo, A. (2013). The nature of innovation in R&D- and non-R&D-intensive service
rms: Evidence from rm-level latent class analysis. Industry and Innovation,
20(1), 4868.
Vence, X., & Trigo, A. (2009). Diversity of innovation patterns in services. The Service
Industries Journal, 29(12), 16351657.
Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User accep-
tance of information technology: Toward a unied view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3),
425478.
Venkatesh, V., Thong, J. Y. L., & Xu, X. (2012). Consumer acceptance and use of
information technology: Extending the unied theory of acceptance and use
of technology. MIS Quarterly, 36(1), 157178.
Verona, G., & Ravasi, D. (2003). Unbundling dynamic capabilities: An exploratory
study of continuous product innovation. Industrial and Corporate Change, 12(3),
577606.
Walter, F. E., Battiston, S., Yildirim, M., & Schweitzer, F. (2012). Moving recommender
systems from on-line commerce to retail stores. Information System E-Business
Management, 10, 367393.
Wang, Y.-S., Lin, H.-H., & Luarn, P. (2006). Predicting consumer intention to use
mobile service. Information Systems Journal, 16(2), 157179.
Wang, Y., & Wu, G. (2010). Empirical research for the effects of dynamic capabil-
ities on business performance in e-business enterprises. In Proceedings of the
international conference on E-Business and E-Government IEEE, (pp. 279282).
Ward, S. C. (1999). Assessing and managing of important risks. International Journal
of Project Management, 17, 331336.
Eleonora Pantano is a post doc research fellow at University of Calabria (Italy)
and researcher at Technical University of Eindhoven (The Netherlands). She holds
a Ph.D. in Psychology of Programming and Articial Intelligence and the Master
Degree in Management Engineering. She is the actual director of the International
Mentroship programme for Management Engineering at University of Calabria. Her
research activities explore marketing management and mainly relate to consumers
attitude and acceptance towards new technology-based retail environments. More
specically, her research aims to improve our knowledge of advanced technolo-
gies affecting the traditional retail environment, consumer behaviour and business
models, and how these are implemented in terms of innovation and technology
management. Furthermore, she is member of the Editorial Board and hoc reviewer
of numerous international journals. Her works appear in numerous international
journals such as the Journal of Marketing Management and the Journal of Retailing
and Consumer Services.