Innovation Systems - Science topic

I'm sending a 60 books about DEA for free.

Visit:

If you liked my statement of DEA books, make a recommendation.

Looks interesting and promosing at the same time.

Taken into account the experiences with lean management and process optimisation, there CIP works bottom-up and is considered as quite successful. Usually CIP supports incremental improvement of processes, but sometimes even radical innovations. So, why should this not work with innovation?

No, the question is not about system or ecosystem. The present need is to find ways to integrate socio-technical systems and socio-ecological systems of innovation. Please refer to the following literature.

Probably too late for this answer... but this manuscript was quite useful when I was trying to define the boundaries of a system dynamics model I was working on. 

Cheers. 

Thank you for the responses.  I am also interested in how integration and sustainability, environmental, or green constructs  have been measured and used in the literature.

Dear Ruth,

yes, it seems that I used it as a monologue platform, to be honest :D  But this shall change from now on! Thanks for the wake-up call!

With "synergies" I mean not to develop DT Labs or DT activities individually, but possibly take a look at comparable projects and ideas to prevent parallell structures. I'll take a more detailed look at all your great Information (thank you!) and come back to you when our project is in a more advanced state.

In short: we focus on DT for eco-innovation, we will develop a neat DT lab in Linz, and we are trying to connect with DT experts (such as you) and bring all together with SMEs struggling with their innovation capability!

All the best,

David

This is a great topic that can be studied at different levels, including individuals, teams, organizations, nations, etc. If you are conduction a qualitative study, it might be useful to consider innovation at all these different levels.

There is an excellent recent review paper you can use to develop your qualitative study:

Anderson, Ptocnik, and Zhou (2014), "Innovation and Creativity in Organizations:.."Journal of Management, 40 (5), 1297-1333.

I wish to thanks for the citations. I think that the reading of the mentioned paper could be so useful to better understand the real effects produced by a Science Parks 

You make a good point about the need for speed (which would suggest that intuition would be the way to go). However, while intuition is useful for making quick decisions, it is not so useful for making successful one. Also, you make a point about the information being in a particular context. I've found is that the most useful knowledge is self-contextualized. For example, with Ohm's law, changes in volts, amps and ohms are understood in relation to each other. The application then becomes obvious - one uses the self-contextual knowledge only in those cases where the concepts relate to the situation (one having amps, volts, and ohms).

Hi Christopher,

Developing countries can consider encouraging the developing of innovation and creativity skills in their students as well as developing systems such as hands-on industry based programs to contribute innovation in firms. The following papers discuss some pedagogical approaches for building such capacity in their universities.

See the following articles:

Rampersad, G., & Patel, F. (2014). Creativity as a desirable graduate attribute: Implications for curriculum design and employability.

Rampersad, G. C. (2015). Developing university-business cooperation through work-integrated learning. International Journal of Technology Management, 68(3-4), 203-227.

Rampersad, G. C. (2015). Building University Innovation Ecosystems: The Role of Work Integrated Learning as a Core Element in the University-Industry Nexus. Journal of Research in Business, Economics and Management, 4(1), 231-240.

Rampersad, G. C. (2015). Managing Innovation Clusters: A Network Approach. Journal of Management and Strategy, 6(3), p9.

The articles are all open access so you should be able to access them. Hope they help.

Best wishes,

Giselle

Hi Dekkiche,

Good question. There are several terms that have been used by researchers and policy makers over the years including innovation systems, clusters and triple helix. The term, entrepreneurial ecosystems is the latest in the rhetoric.

Most of these terms seem to have the similarity of involving the three main players of government, university and business. However, there are differences in terms of the geographic frame of reference – regional, national, global etc. Clusters usually refer to regions while national innovation systems (NIS) refer to the national level and regional innovation systems (RIS) refer to the regional level. Another difference it whether it is limited to one sector/industry or whether it refers to multiple sectors. For instance clusters usually refer to one sector while innovation systems may refer to multiple ones (unless the study specifies sectoral innovation system (SIS)).

See the following article:

Rampersad, G. C. (2015). Managing Innovation Clusters: A Network Approach. Journal of Management and Strategy, 6(3), p9.

Hope it helps.

Cheers,

Giselle

 The organization I'm consulting with has been grappling with this question for years in trying to implement innovation in the agricultural sector in Moengo, a region in Suriname (South America). Based on the experience of this project, there are some steps to be taken, but it depends on who you are: government or private organization. Government can set goals and direct considerable means and resources to achieve them, but they will be effective only if  supported by the other participants in the sector. As a private organization, a small NGO, which is operating regionally to set a good example that can be followed, the private organization doesn't have the possibilities of a national or local government. Another question is also: where do you start from, what is the situation of the agricultural sector? In the case of Moengo the economy  was based on bauxite mining and because the bauxite resources are depleted, other pilars need to be found to support the local economy. Almost every household in the region is already involved in agriculture, but mostly as small-holders practicing ‘shifting cultivation’ without using technology or modern agricultural techniques. And there is also no agricultural education.

 So, here is how we have been trying to innovate:

 1. Set bold goals which are appealing: This is something we discovered to be working, when the project was already running, but it is just like how the USA-government inspired people going to the moon. Paint a different picture of the future. Agriculture in Suriname is known as a poor men’s profession, nobody has become rich by practicing it. You can’t send your kids to school by doing agriculture and sure nobody will send his children to study agriculture.  But if you can show that you can become an engineer, create sustainable energy through agriculture, make medicine from it, feed the world and have a decent living, then it is already becoming more appealing.

 2. Develop an approach: Together with the Technology University of Delft  we developed on the request of the local authorities  an appoach called SOIL (Suriname Development of Innovative Agriculture). It is a technology-, entrepreneurial -, market-based approach. In a period of 20 years at least 100 agro-SME’s must be set up that are able to create sufficient jobs for a population of around 20.000 people. Together the SME's must form a network called Greenport, an concept copied from an agricultural approach in Holland. Greenports are very effective in coordinating all partners in creating regional innovative agriculture centers. Holland has different Greenports and they are very effective in achieving their goals.

 3. Set up an educational system or link existing ones:  A system of education from lower vocational level to university level is needed to support the whole supply chain of the agriculture and food sector.  Capacity building and the addition of vaule are important. Agriculture in the region is not knowledge-based and has no high status with the youth, because you can not earn a living with it. But what is proved in the Netherlands is that knowledge-based and innovative agriculture can provide good paying professional jobs and that the economy of the country depends for an important  part on agriculture and food processing. In Suriname we are building a coalition of knowledge institutions, schools on vocational level (lower and intermediate), higher level (applied universities and universities) working together with foreign institutions which can help create the right capacity.

4. ‘Product to market’ approach: The primary goal is commercial, bringing the products to local - and exportmarkets so money can be made to create jobs and grow the economy. Developing good logistics, introducing high international standards such as Global GAP and HACCP is a must. People must be able to earn an income to support their family and give them a better perspective for the future.  

 5. Make the system upscalable:  Show that what is achieved can be copied. We are concentrating e.g. on tubers: cassava, yam, tayer (Xanthosoma sagitifolium), sweet potatoes. When we create new products, journalists are invited and the whole program is presented again and again, so they report about it. And there are visible results. Bread from cassava flower turned out to be good as the usual bread was widely presented.

Eight years ago we started to build greenhouses as a form of implementing new technology and now the use of greenhouses is accepted, while in the beginning it was not. A group of people that attended our workshops regularly has started a business to produce hydroponic greenhouse systems which use water instead of soil. It is based on precision knowledge and is very innovative. More and more farmers are trying to use affordable greenhouses. People are trying to implement all sorts of greenhouses and the model we introduced is constantly being improved and made cheaper to make it available for the small-holder farmers.

 6. Create facilitators: Financial facilities such as loans must be available for production and export. Storage facilities for cooling are needed. Laws need to be put in place, regulations need to be created to facilitate the process. These are things we cannot do and those are put on the table of government agencies even if they are not the ones who started this project. Their cooperation is important for achieving the goals set.

 7. Research-Programming-Implementation: Carry out reasearch, create programs and turn them into projects that can be implemented. Make people aware of this approach, make people aware by constantly presenting the results that have been achieved.

And bit by bit we are seeing some changes. The idea of using technology instead of the traditional ‘slash and burn’ is taking hold.  Implementing new techniques and new technologies is hard. In Holland it sometimes took more than 50 years to build up a Greenport. In Suriname we expect it will be no different. Implementing innovative changes is very hard.

But government (local and national) has an important role to play because certain activities such as infrastructure (e.g. roads, electricity) cost to much for an entrepreneur and more so for smallholder famers. And further, logistics and export facilities, these are things government has to take care for. So there always must be a cooperation between government and business no matter in which domain the initiative for innovation for the agricultural sector is started.  

I hope the case helps in answering your question. 

sorry I do not have the expertise to answer this question.

Regards

I recommend that you go over two papers (if you already have not) that might help you with this question:

Adams, R., Bessant, J., & Phelps, R. (2006). Innovation Management Measurement: A Review. International Journal of Management Reviews, Vol 8, Iss 1, pp. 21-47.

Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational Innovation: A meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 34, 555-590.

I think you need to narrow your question / search down a bit. This will help in coming up with a possible tool. Context (as identified by Arash Hajikhani above) is important.

Best wishes with your research!

I see Mode 2 as a metaphore of thinking about knowledge creation. There are certainly some practical implications to Mode 2 (involvement of practitioners, different incentive systems), but in my understanding there is no 'pure' Mode 1 or Mode 2 knowledge. You may see Mode 2 as a production model, in fact, that is how Michael Gibbons talks about it: Mode 2 knowledge production. But, in my view, he talks about it more as a metaphore of how to understand the process of knowledge production and the roles of the different actors involved - and how that is different from the traditional/Mode 1 way of thinking about knowledge production. So would not call Mode 2 an innovation system. If you want to connect Mode 2 to innovation systems (NIS, Tripple Helix), I would say that innovation systems may differ in the extent to which a Mode 2 way of working/thinking is present in the system.

Krzysztof is right, I am afraid that asking for basic literature does not reflect a good researcher habit.

My advise is for you to utilize google scholar with some keyword (e.g "innovation systems energy" ... or replace energy with other industry) relating to the topic you are looking for. If you need help in downloading paid articles.. let me know, I should be able to help with that (just the major ones - because i don't have the a lot of time to download articles).

Good luck with your research.

In Iran, some of governmental organization such as SUNA and SABA proposed some financial incentive to self-regulatory industries. For example, any high energy consuming complex that would decrease its energy consume by 4% annually, could receive financial aids, loans and certificates.

It seems that there are not enough governmental incentives to have energy saving manner in Iran. 

My sincere thanks to all to that replied to my question. Your feedback was very helpful.

@Vincent - I watched D. Isenberg's video and thought his commentary around the six domains was intriguing. While it wasn't exactly what I was looking for it did serve as a great idea starter for me.

@Rozeia - Thank you for gathering up the above articles. The Jenkins & Basole articles look to be very interesting.

Kind regards,

Rich

It is important do not forget that RIS, and NIS too, is a theoretical concept. It is an observation instrument (like a microscope) and not an object itself. Such concept allows us to understand the relationships system established (between the mentioned actors) e.g. in the considered region. Such instrument can be used to observe the region at all, an industrial sector within that region (e.g. automobile, agrifood, biotech, etc.), etc. This does not mean that there are one, two or more RIS; the observer is using the instrument for looking at different places.

I am not sure i got your question!

Howvere, in general I could say it depends on the system. you can model the system using computer software and investegate all parameters

Dr. Lupu, I am afraid I cannot follow a part of your argument: "we might consider that every systems intrinsic purpose should be avoiding entropy"  How can you avoid entropy? With very simple words, an engineered system decreases entropy because it imposes an architectural and operational order on all its parts, on itself, and partially on its environment. This applies to living organisms as well, as very properly argued by Dr. Riley. Furthermore, my impression has been that the original (interesting) question of Dr. Rai was more concrete. Of course, sometimes we have to derive explanatory answers to philosophical and/or scientific questions in a deductive way (starting out from existing generic theories), but we also have to consider specific theories in order to be able to address the specificity hiding in the question. In this context, I cannot see a direct relation between (human) purpose and entropy. With kind regards, I.H.

Dear Dr. Arastoo

Thank you for your contribution. As you know Meta-analysis is a research methodology to analyzing the analyses. The value article that you introduced to me is very useful and you and other respective authors have done it in an innovation system context. I will use it and I will follow your other publications through Research gate.

Many thanks.

All the best

In some countries it is mandatory for the public institutions to provide a list of all suppliers they have engaged with on annual basis.

May be you have to check with the government body responsible with purchasing/procurement.

This is a wide topic. It is valid for a thesis. I expect the answer to be more complex than you think as additive manufacturing not only influences the location of production, but also allows different product design solutions. For example, Lego is investigating how printed dies allow faster cooling as they have more complex internal structures. 

Marie,

Ventures should be treated like scientific experiments, which involve identifying gaps in knowledge, developing a hypothesis, designing a test, conducting the experiment, and evaluating the results. If the hypothesis is supported, further research along the same lines can be undertaken with greater confidence. If it is not, the scientist will reflect on the possible reasons and then either stop or redesign the experiment. Even a hypothesis that is not borne out can be valuable, because it offers new insights. Budget approval processes that require proponents of a new business idea to commit to a return on investment (or net present value) goal inhibit managers from approaching ventures in this fashion. Everyone is forced to focus on success or failure in achieving a specific business outcome rather than on insights arising from the hypothesis that led to the venture. It makes much more sense to focus on the option value of a venture—the value of the opportunities it may open up, not all of which are known at the outset.”

Hello Bianca,

Please have a look on the report (attached file) I made with my working team for a Systems Thinking course during our Master's degree. It's about bio-fuels/bioenergy in Brazil from a systemic perspective. It involves the use of system thinking and system dynamics simulations. Any additional information, let me know. 

Regards.

Julio

Dear,

this fact has been established in recent researches that innovation is something that marketing is accepting,

as market is accepting that particular product or service, it defiantly add some value to the market and that particular country, by increasing its sale and revenues.

increasing a countries revenue means increasing GDP of that country.

so in this way the innovation is creating value and adding part in GDP of the country

The previous comment by Hashwini Heerah asnwers the question, i think and points to several important directions to look at. Maybe the questions are "creation of wealth, for whom?", "condanation for whom?". As for poverty and wealth among states, capitalism along with colonisation & imperialism might be a good start to discuss the issue. It is not so easy not to remain poor if people ravage you from the means you have to survive.

Determination of diversity in a workplace will necessitate clarity about the type of diversity we are talking about.

Diversity is of two types: Collective and individual. Collective diversity may again be of two types: It may relate to disadvantaged groups like lower caste employees; gays, certain races; physically challenged; and in some societies even women. Or collective diversity may relate to cultures e.g. nationality, language, accent, food preference, etc. Individual diversity related to the peculiar needs of individuals, e.g. roles, intelligence, education, ideology, personality, single parent, etc.

Whether a workplace is diverse or not will depend upon how diversity is looked at in the organization. Are they discriminated against or are their diversities respected and encouraged.

Most people just comply with the diversity by following legal provisions so as to avoid sanctions. Few use it as business case, as their company brand and employer brand goes up. They generally have to do the following for internalizing diversity in the organization:

1. Make diversity internally-driven , and not just the responsibility of the HR department.

2. Celebrate diversity as part of the ‘mission’ of the organization and as a 'value' of the company.

3. Recruit managers on the basis of their attitude towards diversity.

4. Do diversity training on the basis of needs of people concerned.

5. Allow networking facilities to the diverse groups like women, handicapped people, races, nationalities, etc.

6. Do diversity profile of all people in the organization and feed that data in the information system and HRIS.

7. Design diversity interventions on the basis of the needs of the different groups nd not in the ivory tower.

You may also see the following papers for reference:

I recommend Jaffe & Trajtenberg's book "Patents, Citations, and Innovations" for a few ideas on how to approach the matter.

Best.

Hi, you use the term "innovation system" and in my view one of the main contributions of this literature to our understanding of innovation was, to put the focus on all the organisations, activities, institutions and bottlenecks outside business enterprises which are still crucial for bringing about (or not) innovation. So, it does not matter where you start, but if you want to use the construct of an innovation system you will definitely move beyond the boundaries of a firm. I would suggest these three sources to start off on innovation systems (note that each has a different approach, and you might have to read them a few times) - of course, there are many others that are good reads as well.

Arnold, E. (2004). Evaluating research and innovation policy: a systems world needs systems evaluations. Research Evaluation, 13(1), 3-17. doi: 10.3152/147154404781776509

Edquist, C. (2005). Systems of Innovation. Perspectives and Challenges. In J. Fagerberg, D. C. Mowery & R. R. Nelson (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Innovation (pp. 181-208). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Woolthuis, R. K., Lankhuizen, M., & Gilsing, V. (2005). A system failure framework for innovation policy design. Technovation, 25, 609–619.

Hi Jessica

In this side of the world I know these tools to help to the entrepreneurs...

unfortunately we don't have research of these resources... only this year we begin to do something...

if you need more info just tell me...

A good reference. "National Innovative Capacity", by Porter, M. and Stern, S., The Global Competitiveness Report 2001-2002; New York: Oxford University Press, 2001

Also have a look at this article, a historical perspective on the development of alternative powertarins including the electric:

Michael Porter's three generic strategies are price,differentiation and focus. I feel, price and differentiation, link innovation and industrial engineering. From industrial engineering perspective ,work study ( Method study & Work measurement ) improves, the plant operational efficiency by improving productivity and thereby reducing the cost of production, and thus creating a competitive advantage of charging lower price from the customer. Further Value engineering and Value analysis create product differentiation advantage, thereby making the product more competitive in the market. For sustainable development ,any organization requires to concentrate on product development, product innovation and process improvement through industrial engineering practices to remain competitive in the market. Any innovative product may be subjected to value engineering at the design stage and value analysis thereafter.

You can try the european standard CWA 15899:2008 Standardization of an innovation capability rating for SMEs is very exhaustive.

May I add: (i) a paper on Regional Innovation Cultures, by Trippl and Toedling (http://www2.druid.dk/conferences/viewpaper.php?id=3017&cf=29); and (ii) the notes on session 3 - Innovation Culture (http://www.proinno-europe.eu/sites/default/files/Workshop_Conclusion_42007______42007_____.pdf)