This handbook looks to provide academics and students with a comprehensive and holistic understanding of the phenomenon of innovation. Innovation spans a number of fields within the social sciences ...and humanities: Management, Economics, Geography, Sociology, Politics, Psychology, and History. Consequently, the rapidly increasing body of literature on innovation is characterized by a multitude of perspectives based on, or cutting across, existing disciplines and specializations. Scholars of innovation can come from such diverse starting points that much of this literature can be missed, and so constructive dialogues missed. The editors of The Oxford Handbook of Innovation have carefully selected and designed twenty-one contributions from leading academic experts within their particular field, each focusing on a specific aspect of innovation. These have been organized into four main sections, the first of which looks at the creation of innovations, with particular focus on firms and networks. Section Two provides an account of the wider systematic setting influencing innovation and the role of institutions and organizations in this context. Section Three explores some of the diversity in the working of innovation over time and across different sectors of the economy, and Section Four focuses on the consequences of innovation with respect to economic growth, international competitiveness, and employment. An introductory overview, concluding remarks, and guide to further reading for each chapter, make this handbook a key introduction and vital reference work for researchers, academics, and advanced students of innovation. Available in OSO: http://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/oso/public/content/oho_business/9780199286805/toc.html Contributors to this volume - Jan Fagerberg, University of Oslo William Lazonick, INSEAD Walter W. Powell, Stanford University Keith Pavitt, SPRU Alice Lam, Brunel University Keith Smith, INTECH Charles Edquist, Linkoping David Mowery, University of California, Berkeley Mary O'Sullivan, INSEAD Ove Granstrand, Chalmers Bjorn Asheim, University of Lund Rajneesh Narula, Copenhagen Business School Antonello Zanfei, Urbino Kristine Bruland, University of Oslo Franco Malerba, University of Bocconi Nick Von Tunzelmann, SPRU Ian Miles, University of Manchester Bronwyn Hall, University of California, Berkeley Bart Verspagen , ECIS Francisco Louca, ISEG Manuel M. Godinho, ISEG Richard R. Nelson, Mario Pianta, Urbino Bengt-Ake Lundvall, Aalborg
Our era is one of increasingly pervasive digital technologies, which penetrate deeply into the very core of the products, services, and operations of many organizations and radically change the ...nature of product and service innovations. The fundamental properties of digital technology are reprogrammability and data homogenization. Together, they provide an environment of open and flexible affordances that are used in creating innovations characterized by
convergence
and
generativity
. An analysis of convergence and generativity observed in innovations with pervasive digital technologies reveals three traits: (1) the importance of digital technology platforms, (2) the emergence of distributed innovations, and (3) the prevalence of combinatorial innovation. Each of the six articles in this special issue relates to one or more of these three traits. In this essay, we explore the organizational research implications of these three digital innovation traits and identify research opportunities for organization science scholars. Examples from the articles in this special issue on organizing for innovation in the digitized world are used to demonstrate the kind of organizational scholarship that can faithfully reflect and inform innovation in a world of pervasive digital technologies.
Public policy spanning a broad range of contexts, ranging from the European Union, to states, cities and local communities around the globe, has turned to entrepreneurship to provide the engine for ...economic growth, competitiveness in globally linked markets, and jobs. This book explains why entrepreneurship has emerged as a bona fide instrument of growth policy. The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship suggests that entrepreneurship provides a crucial mechanism in the process of economic growth by serving as a conduit for knowledge spillovers. Investments in new knowledge and ideas may not automatically spill over and result in commercialization, as has typically been assumed in models of economic growth. Rather, the existence of what is introduced as the knowledge filter impedes the spillover and commercialization of investments in new ideas and knowledge. By penetrating the knowledge filter and facilitating the spillover of knowledge that might otherwise not be commercialized, entrepreneurship provides the missing link to economic growth. This new focus of entrepreneurship as a conduit transmitting the spillover of knowledge generates a series of theoretical propositions, involving not just the impact of entrepreneurship on economic performance and growth, but also the very nature of entrepreneurship. The theoretical propositions range from positing that entrepreneurial opportunities are not exogenously given but rather endogenously and systematically created by investments in new knowledge and ideas, to the importance of geographic proximity between entrepreneurial activity and knowledge sources, the impact of location on entrepreneurial performance, and the new roles for board, managers and modes of finance in entrepreneurial firms accessing and absorbing knowledge spillovers. These propositions are subjected to systematic econometric scrutiny and verification using both aggregate data to analyze the links between entrepreneurship and growth, as well as firm-level data to analyze the impact of knowledge spillover on entrepreneurial location, performance, boards, managers and mode of finance. The resulting empirical evidence supports the knowledge spillover of entrepreneurship not only by linking entrepreneurship to economic growth and performance, but also by identifying how the organization and strategy of entrepreneurial firms are influenced by the need to access, absorb and commercialize external knowledge spillovers. The book concludes that the new millennium may not be so much about the process of Joseph Schumpeter's creative destruction, where entrepreneurial startups displace and ultimately drive incumbent company's out of business, but rather characterized by creative construction. Globalization and its concomitant outsourcing and offshoring is the source of the "destruction", especially in terms of lower skilled jobs. By contrast, in the 21st century global economy, entrepreneurship is constructive by commercializing investments in knowledge and ideas that might never have been commercialized but ultimately result in growth, global competitiveness and employment. Thus, the emergence of entrepreneurship policy can be interpreted as the attempt to generate entrepreneurial based economic growth by creating an entrepreneurial economy. Available in OSO: http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/oso/public/content/economicsfinance/0195183517/toc.html
This book is about measuring innovation, not just in the business sector but in every sector of the economy, using, for the first time, an internationally agreed general definition of innovation. The ...resulting indicators can be used to inform policy development, and offer a better understanding of the impact of the innovation policy of governments, the strategy of businesses and the practice of households, in a more digital economy. Innovation is a systems phenomenon and systems provide a structure throughout the book.
•We analyzed the persistency in innovation behavior of firms, using a panel of Community Innovation Survey in Sweden, which spans over a decade.•We distinguish between product, process, ...organizational, and marketing innovations.•There is a variation in the degree of persistency among the four types of innovation.•Product Innovation shows the strongest persistency among all four types of innovation.•Marketing Innovation shows the least persistency.
This paper analyzes the persistency in innovation behavior of firms. Using five waves of the Community Innovation Survey in Sweden, we have traced the innovative behavior of firms over a ten-year period, i.e., between 2002 and 2012. We distinguish between four types of innovations: process, product, marketing, and organizational innovations. First, using transition probability matrix, we found evidence of (unconditional) state dependence in all types of innovation, with product innovators having the strongest persistent behavior. Second, using a dynamic probit model, we found evidence of “true” state dependency among all types of innovations, except marketing innovators. Once again, the strongest persistency was found for product innovators.
The urgent need for innovation to address multifaceted and intertwined water-related challenges is becoming increasingly clear, acknowledged and responded to with cumulating sources and amounts of ...funding. Nevertheless, the water sector has been claimed to be less innovative than other sectors. This Special Volume on the dynamics of water innovation is based on the realization that, in general, there is a striking absence of academic studies on the dynamics of water innovation. This SV is therefore designed to lay the foundations for the field of water innovation studies, in an effort to integrate the emerging insights. Together, the contributions in this SV capture the current understanding of the dynamics of water innovation and provide insights into how the water innovation process can be fostered. The purpose of this introductory article is threefold, namely to frame the discussion on water innovation dynamics in order to contextualise the contributions of this SV, to provide systematic guidance for studying water innovation dynamics and to suggest the way forward for water innovation studies. It captures the extent of the field of water innovation studies with a review of the literature of the last three decades and frames water innovations. Based on five decades of innovation research and drawing on three areas (management, strategy and policy), we provide an innovation studies taxonomy that consists of four organising dimensions: type of innovation, stage of innovation, level of analysis and measurement. This taxonomy enables researchers to study the dynamics of water innovation from different combinations of conceptual and thematic angles, drawing on the field of innovation studies in a systematic fashion. Finally, we reflect on the way forward for water innovation studies with suggestions for future research.
•Editorial introduction to the Special Volume on the dynamics of water innovation.•This SV aims to lay the foundations for the field of water innovation studies.•Provides a taxonomy of innovation studies to guide research on water innovation dynamics.
In this paper, we assess the economic viability of innovation by producers relative to two increasingly important alternative models: innovations by single-user individuals or firms and open ...collaborative innovation. We analyze the design costs and architectures and communication costs associated with each model. We conclude that both innovation by individual users and open collaborative innovation increasingly compete with and may displace producer innovation in many parts of the economy. We explain why this represents a paradigm shift with respect to innovation research, policy making, and practice. We discuss important implications and offer suggestions for further research.
The process of user-centered innovation: how it can benefit both users and manufacturers and how its emergence will bring changes in business models and in public policy.
Innovation is rapidly ...becoming democratized. Users, aided by improvements in computer and communications technology, increasingly can develop their own new products and services. These innovating users—both individuals and firms—often freely share their innovations with others, creating user-innovation communities and a rich intellectual commons. In Democratizing Innovation, Eric von Hippel looks closely at this emerging system of user-centered innovation. He explains why and when users find it profitable to develop new products and services for themselves, and why it often pays users to reveal their innovations freely for the use of all.The trend toward democratized innovation can be seen in software and information products—most notably in the free and open-source software movement—but also in physical products. Von Hippel's many examples of user innovation in action range from surgical equipment to surfboards to software security features. He shows that product and service development is concentrated among "lead users," who are ahead on marketplace trends and whose innovations are often commercially attractive.
Von Hippel argues that manufacturers should redesign their innovation processes and that they should systematically seek out innovations developed by users. He points to businesses—the custom semiconductor industry is one example—that have learned to assist user-innovators by providing them with toolkits for developing new products. User innovation has a positive impact on social welfare, and von Hippel proposes that government policies, including R&D subsidies and tax credits, should be realigned to eliminate biases against it. The goal of a democratized user-centered innovation system, says von Hippel, is well worth striving for.
This article contributes to the study of process innovation as a growth strategy for SMEs, enriching and complementing the well-researched debate about product innovation. Thus, underresearched ...process innovation strategies are analyzed, and their antecedents and innovative performance implications explored. The results show that process innovation strategy is mainly shaped by the acquisition of embodied knowledge, which acts as a key mechanism for countering firms' weak internal capabilities. As process innovation is mainly production oriented, performance consequences are measured using the production process indicators of cost reduction, flexibility and capacity improvement, avoiding traditional misguided measures based on sales, which are more product oriented. Drawing on information for 2,412 firms taken from Spanish CIS data, our results suggest that R&D efforts are not positively related to production process performance, but that the latter is improved by the synchronous co-adoption of organizational and technological innovation. SMEs conducting a process innovation strategy rely heavily on the acquisition of external sources of knowledge in order to complement their weak internal innovative capabilities, and their pattern of innovation shows clear-cut differences from traditional R&D-based product innovation strategies. The article uses a resource-based view framework to generate hypotheses.
In this paper we explore the drivers of different types of eco-innovation in European SMEs. Drawing upon a database of 27 European countries, empirical evidence is found for the different roles of ...supply-side, demand-side and regulatory factors in encouraging the adoption of different types of eco-innovation. Our empirical strategy consists of the estimation of a trivariate probit model. Our results show that those entrepreneurs who give importance to collaboration with research institutes, agencies and universities, and to the increase of market demand for green products are more active in all types of eco-innovations. Supply-side factors seem to be a more important driver for environmental processes and organizational innovations than for environmental product innovations. The results also show that market share only has a significant positive influence on eco-product and eco-organizational innovations, while cost-savings are solely significant for eco-process innovations. Finally, prioritizing existing regulations shapes eco-product and eco-organizational innovations while expected regulations and access to subsidies and fiscal incentives do not have any significant effect on the decision to eco-innovate in Europe at the firm-level.
•Entrepreneurs valuing collaboration with research institutions eco-innovate more.•Supply-side factors foster processes and organizational eco-innovation.•Managers valuing cost-saving factors are only more prone to process eco-innovation.•Market share factors only influence product and organizational eco-innovation.•Expected regulations and access to subsidies/incentives do not affect eco-innovation.
PDF
