More or the same? Radical, disruptive, discontinuous, and breakthrough innovation

Abstract This paper addresses the conceptual ambiguity in the literature on exceptional innovations, labeled “radical,” “disruptive,” “breakthrough,” or “discontinuous.” A bibliometric analysis of 4407 articles shows that different labels are used by papers with shared theoretical foundations and thematic orientation. An in-depth analysis of 60 seminal contributions shows that definitions are (I) not always provided, (II) inconsistent within labels, and (III) not distinctive across labels. This complicates the exploration of the literature and the comparison of results. Definitions, when provided, agree on the existence of two underlying dimensions—novelty and impact—but disagree on how the labels relate to these dimensions. To advance conceptual clarity, we propose a typology of innovation trajectories that treats novelty and impact as distinct concepts and clarifies how and when novelty relates to impact.