Understanding Push and Pull Innovation: A Strategic Guide for IP Management

Beyond Lab vs. Market: Strategies to Align IP Management with Innovation Pathways

Innovation👉 Practical application of new ideas to create value. is the lifeblood of economic growth, but its success hinges on how organizations navigate two distinct pathways: technology-push (TP) and demand-pull (DP). While TP starts with technological breakthroughs seeking applications, DP begins with market needs driving R&D. Recent research highlights the complexity of these systems, their interdependencies, and their implications for intellectual property👉 Creations of the mind protected by legal rights. (IP) management. This blog synthesizes insights from three pivotal studies to provide actionable recommendations for optimizing IP strategies in push and pull environments.

From Linear Models to Innovation Systems

Traditional innovation models followed linear pathways—either technology-push (scientific discovery driving market applications) or demand-pull (market needs steering R&D). These frameworks lacked feedback mechanisms, ignoring the dynamic interplay between technological development and market forces. Modern innovation systems, in contrast, emphasize networked collaboration across firms, academia, and institutions, with success hinging on knowledge exchange, institutional frameworks, collective learning, and organizational agility.

Key Features Explained

• Knowledge Flows: Effective innovation relies on transferring both tacit expertise (e.g., hands-on skills) and codified information (e.g., patents) through partnerships. Channels like joint R&D projects, personnel mobility, and public-private collaborations enhance cross-industry learning and reduce redundant efforts.
• Institutions: Formal rules (e.g., IP laws, education systems) and informal norms shape how organizations innovate. Strong institutions lower risks, align incentives for collaboration, and ensure equitable access to resources like skilled labor and funding.
• Interactive Learning: Innovation thrives through iterative problem-solving with stakeholders like suppliers, customers, and regulators. Shared experimentation—such as pilot programs or open innovation platforms—accelerates adaptation to technical and market uncertainties.
• Economic Competence: Strategic foresight (identifying opportunities), organizational agility (restructuring workflows), and relational skills (managing alliances) determine an organization’s innovation capacity. Competence in these areas enables firms to absorb external knowledge and pivot amid evolving technologies.

This systems-driven approach transforms innovation from isolated efforts into a collective, adaptive process embedded in broader economic ecosystems.

Push vs. Pull Innovation: Key Differences

Technological advancement and market responsiveness define two distinct pathways for innovation: technology-push (TP) and demand-pull (DP). While TP originates from breakthroughs in scientific or technical capabilities, DP emerges from identified market gaps, creating complementary dynamics that shape industrial growth and strategic decision-making.

Technology-Push (Supply-Driven)

Definition: Driven by new technological capabilities (e.g., lasers, semiconductors).

Technology-push innovation begins with scientific discoveries or engineering advancements that seek viable applications. These breakthroughs often enable radical, industry-creating innovations, such as semiconductors or quantum computing, which redefine market possibilities.

Process:

• Develop Technology: Researchers focus on advancing technical knowledge through exploratory R&D, often without predefined market targets. This approach prioritizes scientific curiosity and breakthroughs, such as the invention👉 A novel method, process or product that is original and useful. of lasers, which originated from theoretical physics long before applications like fibre optics or medical devices were conceived. While this method carries high market uncertainty, it enables radical innovations that redefine industries or create entirely new ones.
• Identify Commercial Applications: Post-development, industries systematically explore markets where the technology holds competitive advantages. For instance, cross-industry “application search sessions” bring together experts (e.g., CEOs, engineers, investors) to brainstorm use cases, aligning technical capabilities with unmet market needs. This phase bridges invention and commercialization, reducing market risk👉 The probability of adverse outcomes due to uncertainty in future events. by validating demand and identifying scalable opportunities.

Risk Profile: High market risk (unknown applications): Innovations may lack immediate demand, leading to prolonged commercialization cycles. Typically, 90% of TP inventions face unlicensed patents or failed spin-outs due to uncertain markets. Low technical risk (solution exists): Once developed, the core technology is validated, reducing uncertainties in implementation.

Demand-Pull (Demand-Driven)

Definition: Driven by market needs (e.g., energy-efficient solutions).

Demand-pull innovation responds directly to customer pain points or regulatory demands, ensuring alignment with existing economic or societal challenges. For instance, rising energy costs drive R&D into solar panel efficiency.

Process:

• Identify Customer Problem: Demand-pull innovation begins with rigorous market research to pinpoint inefficiencies, regulatory gaps, or unmet consumer needs. For instance, automotive companies identified the dual pressures of tightening emissions standards (e.g., Euro 7 norms) and rising consumer preference for eco-friendly transport, driving their shift toward electric vehicles (EVs) like Tesla’s Model S. Similarly, healthcare firms use patient surveys and clinical data to design targeted therapies for chronic conditions such as diabetes, ensuring solutions align with real-world demands.
• Develop Tailored Solutions: Once problems are validated, R&D teams prioritize iterative prototyping to refine solutions through rapid feedback cycles. Agile software development exemplifies this approach, where continuous user testing of beta versions—like Slack’s early MVP releases—allows real-time adjustments to features and UI/UX. Consumer electronics companies, such as Apple, similarly leverage prototyping labs to test hardware durability and user ergonomics, ensuring products like the iPhone meet precise market expectations before scaling production.

Risk Profile: Low market risk (applications known): Solutions target pre-validated needs, accelerating adoption and ROI. DP’s labour-friendly outcomes, as solutions often scale existing markets. High technical risk (solution uncertain): Achieving the desired innovation may require untested methods or materials. For example, developing cost-effective battery storage for renewables involves significant R&D uncertainty despite clear market demand.

By understanding these contrasting pathways, organizations can strategically allocate resources, manage risks, and align IP strategies with their innovation ecosystem👉 Network fostering innovation by collaboration and resource sharing..

TRIZ Classification of Invention

The TRIZ👉 A systematic problem-solving method using universal inventive principles. (Theory of Inventive Problem Solving) classification system categorizes innovations into five hierarchical levels based on their significance, potential impact, and inherent risks. Developed through the analysis of millions of patents, this framework distinguishes between radical breakthroughs that redefine industries and incremental improvements that optimize existing systems.

At the highest level (Level 5), innovations represent entirely new concepts that introduce paradigm-shifting ideas with no prior equivalents. Examples include foundational discoveries like the laser, which originated as a theoretical concept without immediate applications. These inventions carry the highest potential to spawn entirely new industries (e.g., telecommunications, medical imaging) but also face the greatest risks due to uncertain market viability and prolonged commercialization timelines.

Level 4 innovations focus on new core technologies that build upon Level 5 concepts to create functional platforms. For instance, the semiconductor laser emerged as a core technology enabling practical applications of laser principles. These innovations still carry high risk but offer substantial opportunities for cross-industry disruption, as they establish the technical backbone for downstream developments.

Level 3 involves core improvements that significantly enhance the performance of existing technologies. A tenfold efficiency gain in a semiconductor laser’s output exemplifies this tier. While these advancements are less radical than Levels 4–5, they provide moderate competitive advantages and require balancing technical feasibility with market adoption risks.

Level 2 encompasses engineering improvements that refine supporting components of a system. For example, optimizing lens designs to boost laser output by 20% falls into this category. These innovations address specific technical constraints with lower risk, as they operate within well-understood frameworks but offer limited transformative potential.

At the base (Level 1), design improvements focus on aesthetic or ergonomic tweaks, such as miniaturizing a laser’s power supply. These changes involve minimal risk and resources but contribute marginally to competitive differentiation, often enhancing user experience rather than technical capabilities.

Higher-level inventions (Levels 4–5) drive radical change and industry creation but demand significant R&D investment and face “solutions in search of problems” challenges. In contrast, lower levels (1–3) prioritize incremental, market-aligned refinements. Notably, only ~5% of patents belong to Levels 4–5, reflecting their rarity and high resource requirements, while ~80% occupy Levels 1–3, underscoring the prevalence of incremental innovation👉 Small, gradual improvements to existing products, services, or processes. in practice.

This classification aids organizations in allocating resources strategically: prioritizing high-level inventions for long-term leadership while leveraging lower levels for steady, low-risk improvements.

Advantages and Disadvantages

Technology-Push Innovation

Technology-push innovation originates from scientific breakthroughs or engineering advancements that redefine industries by creating entirely new markets. These innovations often lack immediate commercial applications but lay the foundation for long-term strategic advantages.

Advantages:

• Enables radical, industry-creating innovations: Breakthroughs like artificial intelligence (AI) and quantum computing emerged from exploratory R&D, spawning trillion-dollar sectors. For example, the discovery of CRISPR-Cas9 gene editing revolutionized biotechnology despite having no initial market roadmap.
• Builds long-term technological leadership: Firms like IBM and Intel dominate semiconductor markets by prioritizing foundational R&D, securing patents that lock in competitive moats for decades.

Disadvantages:

• High commercialization costs: Translating lab-based innovations (e.g., fusion energy) into scalable products requires massive capital, with timelines often exceeding 10–15 years. Around 70% of patented university inventions remain unlicensed due to unclear market paths.
• Risk of “solutions in search of problems”: Technologies like Google Glass failed commercially despite technical sophistication, highlighting the peril of misaligned market fit.

Demand-Pull Innovation

Demand-pull innovation responds directly to market needs, ensuring immediate relevance but often prioritizing incremental progress over transformative change. This approach aligns closely with customer pain points and regulatory demands.

Advantages:

• Aligns R&D with market needs: Companies like Tesla accelerated EV adoption by targeting regulatory shifts (e.g., emissions laws) and consumer demand for sustainability.
• Faster ROI due to clear applications: Agile startups, such as Slack, leverage iterative prototyping to refine products like collaboration tools, achieving profitability within 2–3 years of launch.

Disadvantages:

• Limited to incremental improvements: Most demand-driven innovations (e.g., smartphone camera upgrades) refine existing systems rather than disrupting them.
• Vulnerable to market shifts: Industries like fossil fuels face stranded assets as policies and consumer preferences pivot toward renewables, eroding ROI for legacy solutions.

These findings underscore the need for balanced innovation portfolios, leveraging TP for foundational breakthroughs and DP for scalable, labour-friendly solutions.

Strategic IP Management Recommendations

Navigating IP in innovation systems requires strategies tailored to the unique dynamics of push and pull environments. While technology-push (TP) demands proactive protection of foundational breakthroughs with uncertain markets, demand-pull (DP) thrives on agile IP practices aligned with pre-validated customer needs. The interplay of systemic collaboration, risk profiles, and institutional frameworks (as highlighted by Manley, Kolodovski, and Hötte) underscores the need for adaptive IP tactics that balance exclusivity, knowledge sharing, and market responsiveness.

In Push Innovation Environments

Technology-push innovation demands IP strategies that prioritize securing foundational breakthroughs while navigating high market uncertainty. Success hinges on proactive patent👉 A legal right granting exclusive control over an invention for a limited time. management, cross-industry collaboration, and adaptive commercialization pathways to transform technical potential into scalable applications.

1. Focus on High-Level Inventions

Radical innovations (TRIZ Levels 4–5) form the backbone of long-term competitive advantage in push systems, as they create entirely new markets or disrupt existing ones. These inventions require aggressive IP protection to lock in first-mover benefits while enabling broad licensing👉 Permission to use a right or asset granted by its owner. opportunities.

• Prioritize Level 4–5 innovations: Level 4–5 inventions, such as quantum computing platforms or CRISPR-based gene-editing tools, offer exponential market potential despite unclear initial applications2. Securing broad patents for these technologies blocks competitors and creates licensing revenue streams across multiple sectors (e.g., a semiconductor innovation enabling applications in AI, IoT, and healthcare).
• Example: A superconducting material breakthrough could underpin MRI advancements, fusion energy reactors, and ultra-efficient power grids, requiring patents that cover both core technology and downstream applications.

2. Validate Applications Early

Early application validation mitigates the inherent market risks of push innovations by aligning technical capabilities with latent demand. Structured collaboration with external experts accelerates the identification of viable commercialization paths.

• Conduct application search sessions: Cross-industry workshops with CEOs, VCs, and academics expose novel technologies to diverse problem-solving perspectives (e.g., a biotech firm exploring agricultural uses for its enzyme discovery)2. These sessions reduce time-to-market by identifying high-potential use cases that internal R&D teams might overlook.
• Use invention digests: Regularly publishing summaries of unlicensed patents—like Stanford’s “Super-CBond” superconductor digest—attracts niche players capable of unlocking hidden applications, converting push inventions into demand-driven projects.

3. Leverage Partnerships

Collaborative ecosystems amplify the value of push innovations by pooling technical and market expertise. Partnerships with firms in adjacent sectors de-risk commercialization by sharing costs and co-developing tailored solutions.

• Collaborate with adjacent sectors: A university’s nanomaterial discovery might partner with automotive firms for lightweight batteries and with aerospace companies for heat-resistant coatings, diversifying revenue streams. Such alliances leverage complementary capabilities to accelerate proof-of-concept development.
• Example: Risø National Laboratory’s partnerships with energy storage startups and medical device manufacturers transformed a single superconducting patent into multi-industry applications, maximizing IP ROI.

4. Dynamic Patent Strategies

Push environments demand flexible IP tactics that balance early protection with iterative refinement as applications emerge. Provisional patents and defensive publishing optimize resource allocation while deterring competitors.

• File provisional patents early: Securing provisional rights for core technologies (e.g., a novel AI algorithm) buys time to validate applications before committing to costly full patents2. This approach aligns with Kolodovski’s recommendation to prioritize high-impact inventions while maintaining strategic optionality.
• Defensive publishing for low-potential inventions: Publicly disclosing incremental improvements (e.g., minor semiconductor efficiency gains) prevents patent thickets and frees resources for Level 4–5 priorities, as seen in IBM’s open innovation playbook.

By integrating these strategies, organizations can transform push innovations into market-leading platforms while minimizing risks and maximizing systemic collaboration.

In Pull Innovation Environments

Demand-pull innovation prioritizes market-aligned strategies to minimize technical risks and accelerate time-to-market. Success hinges on agile IP practices, customer collaboration, and leveraging existing industry ecosystems to scale validated solutions efficiently. 

1. Rapid Prototyping

Agile development cycles and iterative testing are critical to refining solutions in response to real-time customer feedback. This approach reduces technical uncertainty while aligning innovations with pre-validated market needs.

• Use agile development to reduce technical risks: Short sprints and modular designs enable rapid iteration, allowing firms to test hypotheses with minimal resource commitment. For example, software companies like Slack used beta releases to gather user feedback before scaling, ensuring product-market fit while containing R&D costs.
• Fast-track patents for customer-validated solutions: Prioritize patent filings once prototypes achieve customer validation to secure IP rights early. Kolodovski (2006) notes that DP innovations at TRIZ Levels 1–3 benefit from provisional patents to protect incremental improvements without delaying commercialization.

2. Customer-Centric IP

Co-creation👉 Collaborative process involving stakeholders to develop innovative solutions. with customers ensures IP strategies align with market demands while sharing risks and rewards. Joint ownership models and brand👉 A distinctive identity that differentiates a product, service, or entity. protection are key to sustaining competitive advantage in crowded markets.

• Co-patent with clients to secure joint ownership: Collaborative IP agreements, as seen in Toyota’s partnerships with battery suppliers, lock in shared rights to innovations while fostering long-term partnerships. This aligns with Hötte’s (2022) findings that DP-driven sectors prioritize labour-friendly, incremental solutions.
• Prioritize trademarks for customer-recognized brands: Trademarks like Tesla’s “Autopilot” protect market identity and build loyalty, complementing technical patents. For example, Dyson’s brand-centric strategy leverages trademarks to differentiate its vacuum designs from generic competitors.

3. Licensing Over Spin-Outs

Demand-pull innovations often lack the disruptive potential to justify standalone ventures. Licensing incremental technologies to established players maximizes ROI while minimizing operational risks.

• License Level 1–3 innovations to established players: Incremental improvements (e.g., 20% efficiency gains in HVAC systems) are better monetized through royalties than risky spin-outs. IBM’s licensing model generates $1B/year from mid-tier patents, avoiding the 90% failure rate of startups (Kolodovski, 2006).
• Avoid costly spin-outs for incremental improvements: TRIZ Level 1–2 innovations, like ergonomic redesigns, rarely justify spin-out costs. Instead, partner with engineering firms like IDEO to integrate improvements into existing product lines.

4. Monitor Competitors

Continuous market surveillance identifies gaps and opportunities in fast-moving DP sectors. Patent analytics tools reveal unmet needs and emerging threats.

• Use patent analytics to identify white spaces: Tools like PatSnap map competitor portfolios to spot under-served applications. For instance, Medtronic identified a niche in minimally invasive surgical tools by analyzing gaps in Johnson & Johnson’s IP landscape.
• Example: Apple’s strategic entry into wearables leveraged patent data to avoid crowded smartwatch markets, focusing instead on health-monitoring sensors validated by fitness enthusiasts.

Cross-Cutting Strategies

Effective IP management👉 Strategic and operative handling of IP to maximize value. in pull systems requires systemic collaboration and adaptive policies. These strategies bridge market agility with institutional support to sustain innovation momentum.

• Build Innovation Networks: Partner with suppliers, universities, and regulators to enhance knowledge flows. For example, Tesla’s open-source patents for EV tech spurred industry-wide adoption while reinforcing its leadership (Manley, 2001).
• Adapt Institutions: Advocate for IP policies that support open innovation, such as patent pools in renewable energy. The Solar Energy Industries Association’s shared IP framework reduced litigation and accelerated solar panel adoption post-2010.

The Role of Systems Thinking

Innovation ecosystems thrive when diverse stakeholders collaborate within aligned institutional frameworks. Robust feedback loops between R&D and markets ensure adaptability to shifting demands.

• Diverse organizations collaborate: Pharma giants like Novartis partner with biotech startups and NGOs to co-develop therapies, blending TP research (e.g., CRISPR) with DP insights from patient groups.
• Institutions align with technological needs: Germany’s Fraunhofer Society links public funding to industry consortia, ensuring IP laws support applied research in robotics and green tech👉 Eco-friendly innovations to reduce environmental impact and promote sustainability..
• Feedback loops between R&D and markets: Toyota’s “lean manufacturing” integrates real-time dealer feedback into design, reducing waste and accelerating hybrid vehicle iterations.

Pull environments demand IP strategies that prioritize speed, customer integration, and systemic collaboration. By balancing agile prototyping, co-ownership models, and ecosystem partnerships, firms can convert market-driven insights into scalable innovations while minimizing risks.

Conclusion

Push and pull innovation systems are fundamentally complementary forces in technological evolution. Technology-push (TP) drives radical, industry-creating breakthroughs—such as AI, quantum computing, and CRISPR—by prioritizing exploratory R&D and high-impact patents (TRIZ Levels 4–5). These innovations thrive when organizations secure broad intellectual property (IP) rights, validate applications through cross-industry partnerships, and leverage dynamic patent strategies like provisional filings. In contrast, demand-pull (DP) ensures market relevance by aligning R&D with customer needs, as seen in agile prototyping for electric vehicles or modular software development. Strategic IP management in DP environments focuses on co-patenting with clients, fast-tracking validated solutions, and licensing incremental innovations (TRIZ Levels 1–3) to established players. While TP carries high market risk due to uncertain applications, DP mitigates technical risks through iterative customer feedback.

Ultimately, success hinges on balancing both approaches within a networked ecosystem. For instance, renewable energy advancements require TP-driven battery innovations, DP-aligned consumer demand, and institutional support like green-tech patent pools. Systems thinking—emphasized by Manley (2001) and Kolodovski (2006)—ensures robust feedback loops between R&D and markets, while collaborative networks (universities, regulators, firms) amplify knowledge flows. Organizations that integrate TP’s disruptive potential with DP’s market agility, while adapting IP strategies to their innovation pathway, will lead the next wave of sustainable, inclusive technological change. This duality not only fuels economic growth but also addresses societal challenges, from climate resilience to equitable labour outcomes, as highlighted by Hötte’s (2022) empirical insights.