Innovation in low tech SMBs: evidence of a necessary constructivist approach

Competitive low-tech manufacturing and challenges for regional policy in the European context--lessons from the Danish experience

“…In line with this, it is argued that low-tech innovation strategies focus more on incremental than radical innovations (Hirsch-Kreinsen 2008a;Hansen 2010). Incremental improvements of products and production processes result in high product quality, high operational efficiency and low scrap rates (Boly et al 2000;Bierly and Daly 2007;Kirner et al 2009;Ismail et al 2011). Process innovation is central to the development and survival of low-tech firms, and process innovation is highly persistent in low-tech manufacturing (Heidenreich 2009;Kirner et al 2009;Cefis and Marsili 2011;Hervas-Oliver et al 2011b;Clausen et al 2012).…”

“…Multiple contributions highlight the importance of suppliers as a source of new knowledge and inputs which would be difficult to obtain elsewhere (Boly et al 2000;Garibaldo and Jacobson 2005;Hervas-Oliver et al 2011b;Grosse and Fonseca 2012). Thus, suppliers from more researchintensive industries are important sources of innovativeness for low-tech firm (Robertson and Smith 2008;Heidenreich 2009;Trippl 2011;Hervas-Oliver et al 2012).…”

A methodology for the development of innovation clusters: application in the healthcare sector

“…For more than 10 years, the French state and administrative regions have pursued economic development policies that stimulate all forms of innovation (Boly et al, 2000;Boly, 2008;Gaffard, 2004;Garcia and Calantone, 2002) and encourage strategic market alliances of the economic stakeholders of a region (OECD, 2005). These "cluster" policies aim to create ecosystems that are conducive to innovation (they disseminate and create new knowledge) and to promoting the emergence of collaborative organizations that may take a variety of forms (local Zimmer B., Le Cardinal J., Yannou B., Piette F., Boly V., 'A methodology for the development of innovation clusters: Application in the health care sector', International Journal of Technology Management, vol.…”

A New Methodology Based on Kano Model for the Evaluation of a New Product Acceptability during the Front-End Phases

“…This model has a systemic approach and is called Resources/Activities/Results flow (RAR) sheet [12]. It consists in analyzing the resources that each stakeholder uses for the accomplishment of his activities and finding the results that he produces.…”

“…Their study on innovative companies sample concludes that in several cases, the product concept was unclear because of a bad understanding of customer needs [11]. Observing the project evolution of ten studied companies, Boly et al remarked that benchmarking analysis and customer needs research are among the factors that impact the evolution of the product concept [12]. Thus, complementary to robust design tasks (involving multi-criteria selection of technical solutions among others) a clear understanding of user's needs is critical to the product innovation success.…”