Resumo

Innovation is a widely recognized and discussed theme. Discussions about its definitions, practices, types, degrees of intensity, and application contexts are essential for the conceptual and practical evolution of the field. By the breadth of nomenclatures, the research landscape concerned with radical innovations (RI) has grown fragmented, leading to a research field that is difficult to overlook. Authors have proposed literature reviews on RI, but there is a gap in approaches that consider the entire spectrum of terminologies that represent the theoretical field of RI.

The absence of a more comprehensive analysis of the RI literature is the main justification of this article. The main evidence that the current literature reviews do not approach the RI theme holistically is the strings used by authors. The articles that perform a broader search do not scan the literature as a research objective. Thus, the importance of developing a study that articulates the theme of RI broadly is highlighted, grouping the different nomenclatures addressed by theory in RI. Mapping the literature and develop a future research agenda are the objetives of this work.

RI is described as innovations that face a high level of uncertainty in multiple dimensions (O’Connor et al., 2008). However, as some scholars have pointed out (Garcia & Calantone, 2002; O’Connor, 2008; O’Connor et al., 2008), there is no universal definition of RI. As a result, many other terms refer to the same, or very similar, kind of innovation. According to Garcia & Calantone (2002), inconsistencies in theoretical and practical applications may arise when knowledge is not correctly defined. This research followed the workflow process described by Zupic & Čater (2015).

Summarizing, clusters present a macro perspective of the field of RI. The main points focus on the established organizations seeking to remain competitive. Ambidexterity is the main subject debated among the clusters, followed by exploration, exploitation, and dynamic capabilities. Other clusters present discussions still emerging about the field. For example, frugal innovation and the innovation ecosystem. Such themes still seek their conceptual consolidation and forms of management. A research framework on RI was developed showing the main pillars of theoretical development in the field

Our research framework considered the diversified nomenclature adopted in the field to understand how radical innovation is being studied, mapping opportunities for future study.Radical innovation research has created a significant impact on management research and is a driver for a firm’s growth.Another contribution of this article is the data analysis method itself, which is structured and, thus, replicable to other themes

Garcia, R., & Calantone, R. (2002). A critical look at technological innovation typology and innovativeness terminology: a literature review. Journal of Product Innovation Management, 19(2), 110–132. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-5885.1920110 Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric Methods in Management and Organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429–472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629