"Radicalness" of the innovations. Innovations 

 may range from imitations of existing tech- 

 nologies to developments of radically new 

 technologies and products. At one end of the 

 spectrum, little or no new knowledge may be 

 involved in an innovation, while at the other end, 

 new and fundamental advances in knowledge 

 may constitute the basis for the innovation. The 

 distribution of innovations along this spectrum 

 was estimated by obtaining ratings of the 

 "radicalness" of the innovations. These ratings 

 were made by the innovating organizations 

 themselves. Although inherently subjective, 

 such ratings may provide some valid insights 

 regarding trends in industrial innovation. 



Each innovation was assigned to one of five 

 categories which together form the 

 "radicalness" continuum: "no new knowledge 

 required", "imitation of existing technology", 

 "improvement of existing technology", "major 

 technological advance", and "radical 

 breakthrough". S'' Of the 225 innovations for 

 which ratings were obtained, only 17 were rated 

 in the first two categories; these innovations 

 were omitted in subsequent analyses. Included 

 among the innovations rated as radical were 

 integrated circuits, permanent magnetic alloys, 

 and L-Dopa, which is used in the treatment of 

 Parkinson's disease. Innovations regarded as 

 representing major technological advances in- 

 cluded hand-held solid state calculators, Ketalor 

 (an anesthetic), and an ultrasonic process for the 

 joining of synthetic fibers. Improvement of 

 existing technology was represented by such 

 innovations as a high-speed phototypesetting 

 machine, resin catalysts, and Pyroceram, a hard, 

 light-weight, and heat-resistant material. 



Innovations involving the improvement of 

 existing technology were most prevalent, 

 followed in order by those which constitute a 

 major technological advance and the set which 

 represents radical breakthroughs (figure 4-20). 

 Over the 1953-73 period as a whole, 41 percent 

 of the 208 innovations included in the analysis 

 were rated as improvements in existing 

 technology, compared with 32 percent in the 

 category of major technological advance and 27 

 percent in the radical class. The most significant 

 change in this distribution during the period 



-•■ The "radicalness" of innovations, it may be noted, does 

 not determine their economic or social significance. In- 

 novations which represent improvements or even imitations 

 of existing technologies may have greater economic returns 

 or social consequences than more radical innovations. 



Figure 4-20 



"Radicalness" of major U.S. innovations, 

 1953-73 



(Percent of Innovations) 

 50 — 



^1 improvement of existing technology 



1 Major technological advance 

 *!^ Radical breakthrough 

 40- 



20- 



1953-59 1960-66 



SOURCE: Gellman Research Associates. Inc. 



1967-73 



centered on the latter two categories. The 

 number of innovations rated as radical 

 breakthroughs declined nearly 50 percent 

 between 1953-59 and 1967-73, while the 

 number representing major technological ad- 

 vances doubled during the same period. As a 

 result of these changes, radical innovations 

 accounted for 18 percent of the innovations in 

 the 1967-73 period, down from 35 percent in 

 1953-59. 



The overall decline in radical innovations (and 

 the corresponding increase in innovations 

 representing a major technological advance) is 

 due primarily to reductions in the number of 

 such innovations from the most R&D-intensive 

 industries (figure 4-21). Radical innovations in 

 these industries decreased from 23 percent of 

 the innovations in 1953-62 to 14 percent in 

 1963-73, whereas the proportion involving 

 major technological advances rose from 20 

 percent to 30 percent over the same periods. 



Research and innovation. The technology 

 embodied in an industrial innovation may be 



106 



