Innovations in Time: A Scientist's Perspective
Letter from the Editor
The paper examined the dimensions of innovation in small scale manufacturing firms with a view to understanding the interaction and relationship among product innovation, process innovation, organizational innovation, and marketing innovation. It further determines the relationship that exists between sales turnover and the four dimensions of innovation. Forty-six small manufacturing firms were sampled across the 4 major small scale Industrial Estates in Lagos State. The paper observed that these small firms engaged mainly in process innovation. The correlation analysis revealed a significant relationship between marketing and process innovation (r = 0.51; p
Ecosystems supporting innovation are being created in many developing countries. Russia is no exception. An examination of the status of the emerging ecosystem in Russia is presented here with indications of its strengths and weaknesses. Six major categories are studied and rated in a relative system of comparison between Russia and various emerging markets as well as the United States. The rating for each category employs several factors which sum to provide a view of the overall standing of the country in areas of market, capital, people, culture, infrastructure and regulations.
Research is more and more split up into scientific disciplines; this may lead to difficulties in associating different branches of specialized knowledge in projects of public usefulness, as innovation processes. The object of this paper is to discuss scientific evaluation of interdisciplinary projects in an innovation context. The development of creative activities is often handicapped by faulty evaluation, while interdisciplinary creativity is largely supported by decision-makers, it is less so by peers, who are often involved in a form of conservatism of paradigms, associated with mono-disciplines. The robustness of traditionally used indicators will be discussed in regard with perceived reputation of researchers involved in interdisciplinary projects. Most of the methodologies for assessing research performance today are largely based on quantitative evaluation using bibliometric indicators, which is not adequate to evaluate interdisciplinary research. In this paper, proposals are made, aiming at developing better methods to assess reputation in the science of complexity, associating integration of scientific fields and leading to innovation. This kind of proposal can lead to changes in the culture of evaluators (and of some researchers) since they will have to take into account a new notion of excellence, associated with a more applied vision, including innovation and the usefulness to Society.
As observed by Porter [1] and Enright [2], clusters occupy a key position in the economy of developed countries, most notably because they bring several benefits resulting from economic and social factors. Although these authors alert us to the importance of social capital mechanisms in clustering processes, they fail to fully explore the psychological and social basis that underlay clusters and clustering processes. In the same vein, while Porter and Sölvell [3] mention that a cluster allows a shared language, social ties, and a set of standards and values to develop, they do not fully expand on how such phenomena develops. Addressing these gaps in the literature, the aim of this study is to investigate the dimensions (i.e. individual and social) which sustain and nurture the existence of macro structures (i.e. clusters). In particular, the current research looked at convergence and divergence mechanisms within a cluster. The exploratory nature of the research required a case study strategy; for this reason a cluster in the Portuguese textile sector was chosen. Data from three companies in the same cluster were gathered using several instruments, namely: a questionnaire, interviews, observation and documentary analysis. The results show that although the three companies operate in the same cluster, they are considerably different in terms of commercial orientations as well as cultural and strategic profiles, which is matched by a low presence of isomorphic mechanisms [4]; this result contradicts that of the Pouder and St. John [5] study. It was also observed that informal relations in the heart of the cluster are commonplace and that managers' differences play a role. In this way, they strengthen and motivate the aspects of the business that unite the cluster.
A fundamental discussion is lacking in the current document on U.S innovation policy from the National Research Council [1] of how invalid innovation styles and business cultures in different combinations discriminates innovation in science and industry. With credit to the philosophy of Immanuel Kant, we redefine innovation as similar to a research process and argue for improvements in the innovation literature to avoid poor results and failed innovation in the future; i.e. the innovation paradox. A critical review of the U.S. innovation policy document originates from our own university-based research and innovation in the occupational safety and health area, which is an area where both research and industry have failed thus far. Our article includes both proposals for a revised national mission based on Kant, as well as examples of how investment in research and innovation can translate and transform innovation ideas into commercial products in networks and eco-systems; and also how collaborative channels might be opened between independent inventors and universities. Our findings are important for both scientists and politicians, as well as for individuals - in industry and in society - who want to commercialize inventions.
In this study, we link discussions about management development in small firms to the work environment of small business managers. In particular, our aim is to examine management development as an experiential process carried out in daily managerial practice. Using structured observations of managerial work, we found that small business managers operate in work environments with rich opportunities for learning. However, we also found that various and unexpected interruptions and problems typically fragment their workdays. In addition, such managers lack peer support and guidance and have few external interactions and little internal communication. As a result, small business managers find themselves in a learning dilemma that, in the long run, may limit their creativity and innovation. Based on these empirical findings, we draw conclusions about support for work-based management development in small firms.
Continuous innovation is critical for the sustainability and development of any society. Innovations should be focused not only at solving the existing needs of the society, but should be geared to the future. Innovation creates new industries, which creates new jobs and new markets while expanding existing ones — all of which contributes to the development of the society. The Indian economy is at a crossroads today, with a burgeoning middle class whose affluence and access to information has increased its appetite for innovative products and processes while still there is a huge population base that does not have access to even the minimum technological advances of the 21st century. India lacks in creating genuinely innovative products and processes/technologies that are new to the world. One of the primary reasons for this is the lack of technological competence in most Indian firms. However, it is wrong to say that there is a lack of innovation in India. The article identifies certain types of innovations in which India has become a leader, and the importance of such innovations in the Indian socio-economic context. It also identifies the limitations of such innovations and why such innovations, though important, may not be sufficient to either bridge the technology gap or generate enough value that can transform the technology landscape in India. It also identifies the limitations of wholesale importation of technologies in order to bridge the gap. To conclude, the authors provide some directions so that India can improve its technological competence as a first step towards developing innovative products and technologies.
This paper shows in theory how a knowledge management system can be built as a human resource management (HRM) function. The solution builds on the notion of innovation benchmarking. A case study from the company ST Ericsson illustrates the discrepancy between what the company needs to do and what the HRM function is able to support when it comes to innovation. The study shows the ability of employees in the company to innovate within key success factors. More worryingly, it also shows key areas where the company is not able to compete and where it is not getting any support from the HRM function. At the end, we identify a number of directions for future research in the field of innovation benchmarking as it relates to HRM policies.
This paper expresses the author's point of view that principles and concepts traditionally identified with Industrial Innovation can be productively applied to activities that are related to the creation of new courses and to the revisions of existing courses that comprise academic programs. The author outlines a proven market based method for successful curricular revision. The approach outlined is derived directly from the traditional stages associated with the innovation process. In support of the viewpoint expressed in this paper, the author makes reference to several classic articles and includes relevant references to his own published work.
Nanotechnology in Building Materials: A Case of ACC Limited
Letter from the Editor
The cluster concept has had great influence on national and regional policies for growth and innovation in Sweden since it was introduced in the late 1990s. This article argues that while the cluster concept has been relatively uncontested on the national policy arena, it has been contested on the regional arena regarding its meaning and proper use. We scrutinize this contestation as a matter of power struggles between different actors concerning the preferential right of interpretation of which organizations, areas and innovations are to be considered as important in policies and practices promoting clusters. The article thus highlights the tricky balance act performed by policy makers and civil servants when deciding on prioritization versus diversification. The article contributes to the further development of both policies and theories on growth and innovation by empirically mapping and discussing the impact of power struggles on clusters as pathways to innovation. In order to exemplify these struggles, our study draws upon two separate studies: one of how the cluster concept has been used as a policy measure over time on national and regional level in Sweden (Säll, 2012) and another of the organization of alternative clusters by Women Resource Centers throughout Sweden (Lindberg et al., 2012). Comparing these two cases makes it evident that the perceptions of clusters that harmonize with prevalent hegemonic discourses of growth and innovation have to large extent enjoyed the preferential right of interpretation, however are at the same time challenged by alternative conceptions of clusters. When highlighted in relation to existing research on innovation, growth policy and power relations, the two empirical examples stand out as interesting cases of how innovation policy has been introduced as academic theory, translated to a political context and subject for contestations that has changed the initial meaning of the concept. Ultimately, it is concluded that the pathways to innovation in the Nordic countries are paradoxical, due to the paradoxical pathway of policies and practices to evoke innovation and change as the same as preserving traditional regional power structures.
Innovations have hitherto mostly been acknowledged in terms of new technical products in both theories and policies on innovation. The public support to the transformation of research results and new ideas into new goods and services, provided by the state as well as by several universities, has thus primarily been adapted to the conditions prevalent in technological and manufacturing industries. Since the Nordic countries have a long tradition in policy and research focusing social aspects of societal development, there ought to be a potential in supporting innovations emanating from the social sciences as well. Social science innovations could then better serve to solve the great economic and social challenges identified on the global level by OECD, on the European level by EU and on the national level by the EU member states, not least the Nordic countries. But as the public support system for innovations is adapted to technological standards and conditions, what possibilities are there to promote and enhance ideas coming out social science driven innovations? Based on an empirical example of a specific social science innovation, this article explores how existing support systems could be adapted to enhance innovation in other disciplines and spheres outside or beyond technological ones. The empirical example emanates from a university in the middle parts of Sweden, where the Grants and Innovation Office engaged themselves in a process of intense adaptation of their services to meet the need of a social science researcher who presented on the idea of an innovation based on research on the area of gender equality. The article describes this particular innovation process step by step from research result to commercialized service using a participatory research design, autobiographical method and experimental method. Based on this empirical example of realizing a specific social science innovation, this article outlines a model for analyzing and promoting and recognizing these type of innovations. The model enables an analysis of the innovation process by its power dimensions, affecting the prospects of realizing the original idea and pinpointing key aspects for promoting social science innovations.
The cluster concept has had great influence on national and regional policies for growth and innovation in Sweden since it was introduced in the late 1990s. This article argues that while the cluster concept has been relatively uncontested on the national policy arena, it has been contested on the regional arena regarding its meaning and proper use. We scrutinize this contestation as a matter of power struggles between different actors concerning the preferential right of interpretation of which organizations, areas and innovations are to be considered as important in policies and practices promoting clusters. The article thus highlights the tricky balance act performed by policy makers and civil servants when deciding on prioritization versus diversification. The article contributes to the further development of both policies and theories on growth and innovation by empirically mapping and discussing the impact of power struggles on clusters as pathways to innovation. In order to exemplify these struggles, our study draws upon two separate studies: one of how the cluster concept has been used as a policy measure over time on national and regional level in Sweden (Säll, 2012) and another of the organization of alternative clusters by Women Resource Centers throughout Sweden (Lindberg et al., 2012). Comparing these two cases makes it evident that the perceptions of clusters that harmonize with prevalent hegemonic discourses of growth and innovation have to large extent enjoyed the preferential right of interpretation, however are at the same time challenged by alternative conceptions of clusters. When highlighted in relation to existing research on innovation, growth policy and power relations, the two empirical examples stand out as interesting cases of how innovation policy has been introduced as academic theory, translated to a political context and subject for contestations that has changed the initial meaning of the concept. Ultimately, it is concluded that the pathways to innovation in the Nordic countries are paradoxical, due to the paradoxical pathway of policies and practices to evoke innovation and change as the same as preserving traditional regional power structures.
Innovations have hitherto mostly been acknowledged in terms of new technical products in both theories and policies on innovation. The public support to the transformation of research results and new ideas into new goods and services, provided by the state as well as by several universities, has thus primarily been adapted to the conditions prevalent in technological and manufacturing industries. Since the Nordic countries have a long tradition in policy and research focusing social aspects of societal development, there ought to be a potential in supporting innovations emanating from the social sciences as well. Social science innovations could then better serve to solve the great economic and social challenges identified on the global level by OECD, on the European level by EU and on the national level by the EU member states, not least the Nordic countries. But as the public support system for innovations is adapted to technological standards and conditions, what possibilities are there to promote and enhance ideas coming out social science driven innovations? Based on an empirical example of a specific social science innovation, this article explores how existing support systems could be adapted to enhance innovation in other disciplines and spheres outside or beyond technological ones. The empirical example emanates from a university in the middle parts of Sweden, where the Grants and Innovation Office engaged themselves in a process of intense adaptation of their services to meet the need of a social science researcher who presented on the idea of an innovation based on research on the area of gender equality. The article describes this particular innovation process step by step from research result to commercialized service using a participatory research design, autobiographical method and experimental method. Based on this empirical example of realizing a specific social science innovation, this article outlines a model for analyzing and promoting and recognizing these type of innovations. The model enables an analysis of the innovation process by its power dimensions, affecting the prospects of realizing the original idea and pinpointing key aspects for promoting social science innovations.
The cluster concept has had great influence on national and regional policies for growth and innovation in Sweden since it was introduced in the late 1990s. This article argues that while the cluster concept has been relatively uncontested on the national policy arena, it has been contested on the regional arena regarding its meaning and proper use. We scrutinize this contestation as a matter of power struggles between different actors concerning the preferential right of interpretation of which organizations, areas and innovations are to be considered as important in policies and practices promoting clusters. The article thus highlights the tricky balance act performed by policy makers and civil servants when deciding on prioritization versus diversification. The article contributes to the further development of both policies and theories on growth and innovation by empirically mapping and discussing the impact of power struggles on clusters as pathways to innovation. In order to exemplify these struggles, our study draws upon two separate studies: one of how the cluster concept has been used as a policy measure over time on national and regional level in Sweden (Säll, 2012) and another of the organization of alternative clusters by Women Resource Centers throughout Sweden (Lindberg et al., 2012). Comparing these two cases makes it evident that the perceptions of clusters that harmonize with prevalent hegemonic discourses of growth and innovation have to large extent enjoyed the preferential right of interpretation, however are at the same time challenged by alternative conceptions of clusters. When highlighted in relation to existing research on innovation, growth policy and power relations, the two empirical examples stand out as interesting cases of how innovation policy has been introduced as academic theory, translated to a political context and subject for contestations that has changed the initial meaning of the concept. Ultimately, it is concluded that the pathways to innovation in the Nordic countries are paradoxical, due to the paradoxical pathway of policies and practices to evoke innovation and change as the same as preserving traditional regional power structures.
Innovations have hitherto mostly been acknowledged in terms of new technical products in both theories and policies on innovation. The public support to the transformation of research results and new ideas into new goods and services, provided by the state as well as by several universities, has thus primarily been adapted to the conditions prevalent in technological and manufacturing industries. Since the Nordic countries have a long tradition in policy and research focusing social aspects of societal development, there ought to be a potential in supporting innovations emanating from the social sciences as well. Social science innovations could then better serve to solve the great economic and social challenges identified on the global level by OECD, on the European level by EU and on the national level by the EU member states, not least the Nordic countries. But as the public support system for innovations is adapted to technological standards and conditions, what possibilities are there to promote and enhance ideas coming out social science driven innovations? Based on an empirical example of a specific social science innovation, this article explores how existing support systems could be adapted to enhance innovation in other disciplines and spheres outside or beyond technological ones. The empirical example emanates from a university in the middle parts of Sweden, where the Grants and Innovation Office engaged themselves in a process of intense adaptation of their services to meet the need of a social science researcher who presented on the idea of an innovation based on research on the area of gender equality. The article describes this particular innovation process step by step from research result to commercialized service using a participatory research design, autobiographical method and experimental method. Based on this empirical example of realizing a specific social science innovation, this article outlines a model for analyzing and promoting and recognizing these type of innovations. The model enables an analysis of the innovation process by its power dimensions, affecting the prospects of realizing the original idea and pinpointing key aspects for promoting social science innovations.
The cluster concept has had great influence on national and regional policies for growth and innovation in Sweden since it was introduced in the late 1990s. This article argues that while the cluster concept has been relatively uncontested on the national policy arena, it has been contested on the regional arena regarding its meaning and proper use. We scrutinize this contestation as a matter of power struggles between different actors concerning the preferential right of interpretation of which organizations, areas and innovations are to be considered as important in policies and practices promoting clusters. The article thus highlights the tricky balance act performed by policy makers and civil servants when deciding on prioritization versus diversification. The article contributes to the further development of both policies and theories on growth and innovation by empirically mapping and discussing the impact of power struggles on clusters as pathways to innovation. In order to exemplify these struggles, our study draws upon two separate studies: one of how the cluster concept has been used as a policy measure over time on national and regional level in Sweden (Säll, 2012) and another of the organization of alternative clusters by Women Resource Centers throughout Sweden (Lindberg et al., 2012). Comparing these two cases makes it evident that the perceptions of clusters that harmonize with prevalent hegemonic discourses of growth and innovation have to large extent enjoyed the preferential right of interpretation, however are at the same time challenged by alternative conceptions of clusters. When highlighted in relation to existing research on innovation, growth policy and power relations, the two empirical examples stand out as interesting cases of how innovation policy has been introduced as academic theory, translated to a political context and subject for contestations that has changed the initial meaning of the concept. Ultimately, it is concluded that the pathways to innovation in the Nordic countries are paradoxical, due to the paradoxical pathway of policies and practices to evoke innovation and change as the same as preserving traditional regional power structures.
