Roadmap for Innovators in the Process of Innovation for Development

Koottatep, Thammarat; Sukavejworakit, Krisakorn; Virasa, Thanaphol

doi:10.3390/su13010084

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research on social capital for respondents in Poland and Lithuania confirmed the findings of Hadjielias et al [28], specifically that a high level of social capital, especially trust, facilitates the entrepreneurial process. Moreover, the authors agree with Koottatep et al [35], in that, by analyzing (and understanding) the interactions of company innovators with stakeholders, i.e., key partners, we can better understand the innovation process for development. This will allow us to develop responsible research and innovation (RRI) methods, i.e., research that will not only help a business make profits, but also contribute to the common good of society and science.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

“…This is needed because companies are often unaware of the negative consequences of inappropriate innovation implementation [34]. To prevent the negative effects of irresponsible innovation, the European Commission introduced a framework for responsible research and innovation (RRI) [35]. In this framework, implementing RRI requires multiple stakeholders to work together to find solutions to societal challenges.…”

Section: Conceptual Problems In Implementing Rri In Science and Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This need exists because a company implementing innovations is a member of a business ecosystem with participants who are highly interdependent on each other and governed by self-regulatory behavior. It may also be that the environment in which innovations are implemented may be regulated, which entails the need for collaboration with multiple government institutions [35]. Hence, when analyzing the concept of responsible research and innovation, attention should also be placed on factors such as the public's perception of democracy, the level of civil society, and the evaluation of the general activity of public institutions.…”

Section: Conceptual Problems In Implementing Rri In Science and Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Shared Taxonomy for the Implementation of Responsible Innovation Approach in Industrial Ecosystems

Valackienė

Nagaj

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Symbolic narratives, such as an “ivory tower”, a “grey zone”, or a “black box” tell us about the gap between university and society, and academia and industry. Recently, they have been replaced by the Quadruple Helix model, which closes the gap by connecting four main stakeholders—government, university, industry, and society, into an innovation ecosystem. However, the roles of the different stakeholders are often blurred and difficult to define, and it is difficult to develop a basic approach to implement responsible innovations in industrial ecosystems in general. On the other hand, the interactions between stakeholder groups, especially universities and industry, are not sufficiently demonstrated in both scientific literature and empirical studies. We note that the responsible research and innovation (RRI) approach should facilitate a framework of shared taxonomy among stakeholders. By highlighting this situation, we follow the paradigm of emerging thinking and we seek to fill this knowledge gap theoretically and empirically. Therefore, in this study, we combined several strategies and perspectives. First, we conducted survey research concerning social capital in Poland and Lithuania to understand the impact of social capital and trust on stakeholder cooperation. Second, we conducted interviews with scientists who actively work to transfer knowledge into industry. Third, we utilized field notes from working experiences in research management. This work has theoretical and practical implications. The theoretical contribution of the paper demonstrates the construction of methodology based on emerging perspectives, and new theoretical insights, on professional discourses for implementing the responsible innovation approach in industrial ecosystems, by highlighting the commitments of main stakeholder groups. Practical input: our insights and empirical research will contribute toward sustainability policymaking and achieving substantial results in industrial ecosystems. The results indicate that if there is trust, then the government, companies, and society (in Poland and Lithuania) would be willing to cooperate with each other. However, there is a lack of trust and cooperation between universities and businesses. Stakeholders have become increasingly aware of the emergence of a science and industry cooperation as an open platform, enlarged with society and policies. They note the problem of making research public and transparent as part of a new mode of cooperation; however, they articulate RRI as a framework of shared taxonomy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 68%

Section: Conceptual Problems In Implementing Rri In Science and Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conceptual Problems In Implementing Rri In Science and Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Shared Taxonomy for the Implementation of Responsible Innovation Approach in Industrial Ecosystems

Valackienė

Nagaj

2021

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The trend towards an increasing complexity comes from the fact that since 1970, complex technologies comprising the 30 most valuable world goods exports increased from 43% to 84% (Kash and Rycroft, 2002). Moreover, because of several scientific disciplines and knowledge areas that need to be integrated and multiple players needed to be involved, the complexity of innovation processes keeps growing (Koottatep et al, 2021). As a result, the innovation journey tends to progress in unpredictable ways over time in a nonlinear cycle of divergent and convergent activities (Van De Ven, 2017).…”

Section: Complex Product and Systems (Cops) In Contemporary Industrymentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation in Complex Products and Systems (CoPS) : The Coordination of Technology Development within Networks and Projects

Franca

2023

Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complex Product and Systems (CoPS) has been considered a cornerstone of a national innovation strategy. Telecommunications network systems, aircrafts, gas turbines and weapon systems are example of CoPS, and their management are characterized distinctly different from mass-market commodity goods. CoPS developments play an important role in shaping the modern industrial dynamics, since most, if not all, modern commodity goods and services depend on CoPS for their production. Following society's increasing dependence on CoPS with ever increasing complexity, more research is needed to further uncover the innovation processes that occurs during the long-term evolution and maturation of technologies and tailored solutions needed for CoPS. This technology evolution, from the discovery of basic scientific principles until the development of technology demonstrators and products, usually happens within R&D projects executed and coordinated by a wide range of networked actors, from universities, SMEs, large firms, research institutes, industrial organizations and funding agencies.Hence, it is important to highlight the perspectives of networks and projects to better understand the innovation process during the development of CoPS. In this context, this Thesis aims to explore the coordination of technology development addressing networks and projects, since the latter are usually considered the main unit of analysis for CoPS innovations and require high levels of coordination efforts within a network of diversified actors.For this purpose, a case study methodology is used with a systematic combining approach, where the theoretical framework, empirical fieldwork, and case analysis are continuously revisited in an iterative way.By describing and integrating the perspectives of networks and projects, it is suggested that projects are a crucial unit of analysis for understanding network dynamics since they are the mechanisms that enable interactions and collaborations for the development of relationships, which ultimately, creates a shared identity.The results show how diverse actors from different strategic nets can interact to develop a research agenda, coordinate the network of actors and direct the technology path where the research agenda potentially contributes to shape a network of R&D projects enabling the network actors to position and reposition themselves. Contributions are made to the CoPS literature and the dichotomy between managing within and iv managing of the network. It is discussed how network capabilities can be a key component in a network alignment process and their relationship with systems integration, the core capability of a CoPS leading firm. It is suggested that, when the networked actors want to improve their network position, they need to identify matching strategic nets, position themselves and contribute to the shaping of their value systems aligning with their strategies. In his context, the Technology Readiness Levels (TRL) become an essential tool to make this matching since it communicates t...

show abstract

“…Referring to EU innovation policies, Clark and Guy (1998) identify in the EU a number of paradoxes in the relationship between research and productivity, due to the inability of many Member States to make the most of their existing innovation base; the two authors consider the linear models of innovation to be outdated and propose "focusing European policies on promoting the diffusion and efficient use of technologies in order to close the development gaps and solve the paradoxes of research and productivity" (Clark and Guy, 1998, p. 389). Along the same lines, Shim and Shin (2022) show that the value of R&D investment does not necessarily have an impact on the performance of R&D programs, so that in order to generate the efficient effects of innovation it is necessary to add an efficient management of the innovative process (Tidd and Bessant, 2018), to use a highly qualified human resource (Koottatep, Sukavejworakit and Virasa, 2021) and to adopt adequate marketing strategies and implementation of R&D programs (Chabowski and Mena, 2017).…”

Section: Review Of the Scientific Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation and Competitiveness in the European Union with and without Britain

Teclean¹

2022

New Trends in Sustainable Business and Consumption

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper aims to assess the correlation between economic competitiveness and innovation potential within the European Union in the context of Brexit. For the quantitative evaluation of the mentioned relationship, we use the World Economic Forum Index as a proxy variable for economic competitiveness, respectively the following five indicators for different dimensions of the innovative potential at the level of EU member states: gross expenditures on R&D, R&D personnel, innovative enterprises, patent applications, and high-tech exports. In our research, we want to find out the impact of Brexit on the correlation between innovation and competitiveness in the EU, in which sense we demonstrate the hypothesis that the UK's exit from the EU has led to a differentiated reduction in the contribution of different innovative components on competitiveness. The main objective of our analysis aims to quantify / rank the intensity of the correlation between the different indicators of innovation and competitiveness, on the whole EU-27 compared to EU-28 in 2019 (the year before Brexit). In order to determine the intensity of the correlations, we calculated the correlation coefficients and the coefficients of determination between the variables of innovation and economic competitiveness, and then, to identify management priorities, we analyzed comparatively the values for EU-28 and EU-27 for each category of indicators. Our findings show that the strongest correlations are between competitiveness and R&D expenditures, respectively high-tech exports to both the EU-28 and the EU-27, but the most visible impact of Brexit was on the R&D personnel, an indicator whose contribution to competitiveness recorded the most significant decrease post-Brexit. In this context, the original contribution and practical implications of this research are given by the identification of priorities for intervention in the field of innovation to improve competitiveness in the EU-27 post-Brexit.

show abstract

Roadmap for Innovators in the Process of Innovation for Development

Cited by 6 publications

References 33 publications

Shared Taxonomy for the Implementation of Responsible Innovation Approach in Industrial Ecosystems

Shared Taxonomy for the Implementation of Responsible Innovation Approach in Industrial Ecosystems

Innovation in Complex Products and Systems (CoPS) : The Coordination of Technology Development within Networks and Projects

Innovation and Competitiveness in the European Union with and without Britain

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About