Innovation indices: the need for positioning them where they properly belong

Abstract

A specific quality of the discussion about innovation indices (scoreboards) is that more often than not the subject is dealt with from a purely technical point of view. Such a narrow approach silently assumes that indices used as a policy tool are an accurate reflection of the phenomenon and should not be questioned, and also that the whole discussion concerning them should refer to methodological aspects and is best left to the statisticians. This author is of the opinion that for an accurate evaluation of the value of indices as a policy tool, it is necessary to consider the matter from the broader point of view and from the context in which such indices are generated and used. This article puts forward the thesis that progress in science and innovation policy studies depends on a diversity of issues, approaches and perspectives. If that is the case, maintaining thematic and methodological variety may be more important than creating coherent and closed analytical tools, i.e. indices. The advantage of indices is that they focus attention on those variables which are deemed to be key. Among their disadvantages, however, are their highly abstract nature (in order to understand innovation-related phenomena, it is necessary to study them in tangible, composite forms); their tendency to skip unmeasurable determinants; their prior acceptance of definitions and concepts of innovation (instead of searching for them); the way they apply a single yardstick to diverse countries and regions, assumed linearity and causality in a complex and non-linear world, the way they direct policy towards implementing indicators (rather than identifying and solving problems). It is suggested that big data revolution will allow the emergence of a new measurement tools that will replace innovation indices.

Understanding social innovation processes in rural areas: empirical evidence from social enterprises in Germany

“…What is known about innovation dynamics often reflects what has been called an urban bias (Shearmur, 2012). This is apparent from the measurements and indicators used to compare the innovation performance of different regions, such as the Regional Innovation Scoreboard (Hollanders et al , 2019), which analyses performance indicators, including numbers of patent applications and publication rates of scientific articles, which neither correspond to rural-area characteristics (Kozłowski, 2015) nor generally improve living conditions in rural areas. From this point of view, actors living in less populated areas, which we define as rural areas (BBSR, 2019), generate less innovation than actors living in densely populated areas.…”

A Project Management Plan to Reach Sustainable Competitive Advantage for a Photovoltaic (PV) Manufacturer

“…In addition, the exploitative projects were more successful at the end. Therefore, the firm needed to adopt the proposed model for the next three years (from year 4 through year 6) to balance its current plan by punctuated adjustment and execute new projects by flexible adjustment [31]. After defining the NPD project selection problem and constructing the evaluation network, the authors invited senior managers to confirm the suitability of the network, which comprised three general criteria and ten detailed criteria.…”

An Overview of Innovation in the Arab Gulf States: From Origins and Five‐Year Plans to New Cities and Indices

“…With the aforementioned caveats for measuring innovation it might appear that there are no ways to quantify the phenomenon. Yet, roughly 150 indices purport to do just that; measuring, quantifying and assessing innovation to evaluatively rank one country's level of innovativeness versus that of another (Kozlowski, 2015) or influence how national and local innovation efforts will play out. This happens with the annual Global Innovation Index (GII).…”

“…But even if the problem of defining innovation is put aside other uncertainties remain about the reliability and usefulness of its measurement. Fundamental concerns over how to gauge the sheer diversity of innovations that emanate from various professional sectors are considerable as is the reality that innovations can take time to mature (Kozlowski, 2015). However, if all these complications can also be sidestepped, there is still the riddle of figuring out what the measure of a country's innovation is supposed to mean.…”