Transcript 슬라이드 1

<2014 Spring Seminar on Technological Innovation>
Session 1.
Overview of the Field
2014. 3. 11
발표자 : 김현식, 이연화, 안경선
0
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Summary & Discussion
(1) Nelson, R & Winter, S.(1977), In search of useful theory of innovation,
Research Policy(5), 36-76
(2) Pavitt, K.(1984), Sectoral Patterns of technical change : Toward a taxonomy
and a theory, Research Policy, 13(6), 343-373
(3) Kuhn, T. S.(1970), The Structure of scientific revolutions(2d ed.). Chicago :
University of Chicago Press, [Chapter 2 and 7]
(4) Van de Ven, A. H.(1986), Central Problems in the management of innovation,
Management Science, 32(5), 590-607
3. Implication & Concluding Discussion
1
Introduction
2
1. Introduction
◀ Peter Drucker
"Innovation is the fuel of
corporate longevity.
It endows resources with
a new capacity to create
wealth."
▲ Joseph A. Schumpeter - Creative destruction
[...] The fundamental impulse that sets and keeps the capitalist engine in motion comes
from the new consumers’ goods, the new methods of production or transportation,
the new markets, the new forms of industrial organization that capitalist enterprise creates.
[...] incessantly revolutionizes the economic structure from within, incessantly
destroying the old one, incessantly creating a new one.
This process of Creative Destruction is the essential fact about capitalism.
It is what capitalism consists in and what every capitalist concern has got to live in.
3
1. Introduction
Key concepts
 Theory of Innovation
 Uncertainty of Innovation
 Technological regime
 Technical change / Taxonomy
 Technology push vs. Demand pull
 Product vs. Process Innovation
 Diversification
 Normal science / Paradigm shift / Science Revolution
 Technology trajectory
 4 Factor & 4 central problem in the management of innovation
4
<session 1 : overview of the field>
Nelson, R & Winter, S.(1977)
In search of useful theory of innovation,
Research Policy(5), 36-76
발표자 : 안경선
5
2-1. Summary
: Introduction
Purpose of the PAPER
 The theory integrates existing knowledge, and
enables predictions to go beyond the particulars of what has been observed.
 The theory must be wide enough to encompass and link the
relevant variables and their effects, and strong enough to give guidance
as to what would happen if some of these variables changed.
Two premises of the current dialogue innovation
 The technological advance has been a powerful instrument of
human progress in the past.
 We have the knowledge to guide that instrument toward high priority
objectives in the future.
6
2-1. Summary
: THE STATE OF CURRENT UNDERSTANDING
The economists' model of differential productivity growth
 Kendrick’s study
- concerned with explaining cross sectoral differences in growth of total factor
productivity, rather than output per worker.
 Mansfield’s study (dealt only with manufacturing)
- was focused in the relationship between growth of total factor productivity
and R & D spending
 Leonard’s study (dealt only with manufacturing)
- separation of R&D spending financed by the industry itself,
and R&D spending done in an industry but financed by government.
 Brown and Conrad’s study (dealt only with manufacturing)
- include in their regressions a measure of R&D done by other industries
and embodied in the intermediate goods purchased by the industry
 Terleckyj’s study
- considers nonmanufacturing industries as well as manufacturing industries.
- distinguishes between research and development embodied in
capital equipment, and in intermediate inputs
7
2-1. Summary
: THE STATE OF CURRENT UNDERSTANDING
Building blocks for a broader theoretical structure
 Two of these facts indicate that it is not promising to use the theoretical
structure behind the productivity growth studies as a starting point.
① innovation involves uncertainty in an essential way.
② the institutional structure for innovation often is quite complex
within an economic sector, and varies significantly between economic sectors.
8
2-1. Summary
: THE GENERATION OF INNOVATION
The profit maximization hypothesis and its limitations
 The key concept is that of an innovation possibility set associated with
a given level of expenditure, or with different elements associated with costs
of different amounts. Firms are assumed to choose the profit maximizing
element.
 In many cases, the organizations doing R&D are not motivated by
profits at all, but are governmental, or private not-for-profit institutions.
R&D strategies and probabilistic outcomes
 An R&D project can be viewed as interacting heuristic search processes.
 Since project selection implies project heuristics, an R&D strategy can be
viewed as defining a probability distribution of number and kinds of
innovations, given certain variables that influence project selection and
project outcome.
 R&D strategies can be dichotomized into these two. The first strategy
has been named ‘demand-pull’; the second ‘capabilities-push’.
9
2-1. Summary
: THE GENERATION OF INNOVATION
R&D strategies and probabilistic outcomes
 If strategies can be so dichotomized, demand-pull is by far the more
common of the two.
Further, when applied, demand-pull is more likely to result in a commercially
successful project than a strategy of capabilities-push.
However, capabilities-push selected projects, when they do pay off, pay off
handsomely.
Natural trajectories
 Marginal changes in external conditions influence at most the ranking in
terms of profitability of the set of profitable projects associated with
pushing technology in a particular direction.
 Relating to technicians’ beliefs about what is feasible or
at least worth attempting
 특정 계층 내에서 기술혁신의 방향은 특정 방향성을 가지게 되어있다는 것
10
2-1. Summary
: THE SELECTION ENVIRONMENT
Elements of the selection model
 The selection environment influences the path of productivity growth
generated by any given innovation, and also it feeds back the influence
strongly of the kinds of R & D that firms and industry will find profitable
to undertake.
 Two roughly distinct kinds of mechanisms for the spread of a
profitable innovation.
① greater use of an innovation by the firm that first introduces it
② imitation
 general model of the selection environment can be built from specification of
these three elements: the definition of ‘worth’ or profit that is operative for
the firms in the sector, the, manner in which consumer and regulatory
preferences and rules influence what is profitable, and the investment and
imitation processes that are involved.
11
2-1. Summary
: THE SELECTION ENVIRONMENT
The market as a selection environment
 Successful innovation leads to both higher profit for the innovator and
to profitable investment opportunities.
 Imitation by a competitor of a process innovation is likely to occur relatively
rapidly, and to be encouraged by a marketing supplier, rather than being
retarded by a patent.
 Both expansion of the innovator, and imitation by competitors are essential
to the viability of Schumpeterian process.
Nonmarket selection environment
 the motivations of the firms in a nonmarket sector cannot simply be
presumed to be monetary profit.
12
2-1. Summary
: THOUGHTS ON THE EFFECTS OF INSTITUTIONA
Two critical requirements for a theory
 Be treated as inherently stochastic
 be capable of encompassing considerable institutional complexity and variety.
Two major theoretical proposals
 modeling innovation generation as the conditional probabilistic outcome of
various R & D strategies, and modeling the fate of an innovation in terms of
the workings of a selection environment
13
2-1. Discussion
대다수의 사람들은 원하는 것을 보여주기 전까지
자신이 무엇을 원하는지 모른다
Steve seemed to say that Apple’s innovation strategy based on
capabilities-push rather than demand-pull.
Do you agree with him?
14
2-1. Discussion
Nelson & Winter said that imitation by a competitor of a process
innovation is likely to occur relatively rapidly, and to be encouraged by
a marketing supplier, rather than being retarded by a patent.
What do you think the difference between imitation and
innovative imitation?
15
<session 1 : overview of the field>
Pavitt, K.(1984),
Sectoral Patterns of technical change :
Toward a taxonomy and a theory,
Research Policy, 13(6), 343-373
발표자 : 김현식
16
2-2. Summary
Overview
 Purpose
 to explain similarities and differences amongst sectors in the sources,
nature and impact of innovations
 Economic development and social change’s essential factors :
production, adoption and spread of technical innovations
 Technical innovation is a distinguishing feature of the products and
industries where high wage countries compete successfully on world
markets
 Data base




Volume-2,000 significant innovations and of innovating firms in Britain
Period : 1945~1979 (collected by Townsend et al.)
Sample of innovations : 3, 4 digit product groups
Experts in different sectors
 Approach and structure
 A series of statistical tests
 Econometric analysis
17
2-2. Summary
Analysis of the data
 Information in the data bank
 Source of the main knowledge inputs into the innovation were identified
by asking the sectoral experts
 Information on the sectors of production of innovations come from the
sectoral experts (process innovation, product innovation)
 Information on the size and principal sector of activity of innovation firms
 Information on the principal activity of innovation firms (diversification)
 Innovation in the data base
 The
 The
 The
▶ In
sector of production of the innovation
sector of use of the innovation
sector of the innovating firm’s principal activity.
the sectoral patterns of technological diversification
 to compare sectors in terms of
 The sectoral source of technology used in a sector
 The institutional source and nature of the technology produced in a sector
 The characteristics of innovating firms
18
2-2. Summary
Sectoral technological trajectories
 Three characteristics : Sources of technology, Users’ needs, Mean of appropriating benefits
19
2-2. Summary
A taxonomy and a theory of sectoral patterns of technical change
High degree of dependence
on external sources for
process technology
Relatively small proportion of
innovative activity devoted to
product innovations
(Percentage of Product innovation)
Technological diversification mainly
vertically into production technology
with very little movement into other
product markets
Relatively small
average size of
innovating firm
Relatively big contribution to
innovations in the sector by firms
with their principal activities
20
2-2. Summary
Pavitt taxonomy
 Four category of firms
1. Supplier dominated firms are typically small and found in manufacturing and non-manufacturing sectors.
Most technology comes from suppliers of equipment and material.
2. Scale intensive firms are found in bulk materials and assembly. Their internal sources of technology are
production engineering and R&D departments. External sources of technology include mainly interactive
learning with specialised suppliers, but also inputs from science-based firms are of some importance.
3. Specialised suppliers are small firms, which are producers of production equipment and control
instrumentation. Their main internal sources are primarily design and development. External sources are
users (science based and scale-intensive firms).
4. Science based firms are found in the chemical and electronic sectors. Their main internal sources of
technology are internal R&D and production engineering. Important external sources of technology
include universities, but also specialised suppliers.
21
2-2. Summary
Technological Linkage
 The main technological linkages amongst different categories of firm
Supplier
Dominated
Firms
Science-based
Firms
Scale-intensive
Firms
Specialised
Equipment
Suppliers
22
2-2. Summary
Analytical implication
 Science and technology push vs. demand pull
- The close relationship between investment in user sectors and innovative activities in
upstream capital goods(Schmooker, Scherer)
- Investment activities in supplier dominated and production intensive firms are likely to
stimulated innovative activities in both the productions engineering departments of
user firms, and the upstream firms supplying capital goods.
- Not expect Science-based firms a similarly neat and lagged correspondence between
the volume of investment in user sectors and of innovative activities.
- Scherer found that in materials sectors, in contrasts to capital goods, the statistical
relationship between the volume of innovative activities and of investment
in user sectors is much weaker
23
2-2. Summary
Analytical implication
 Product vs. process innovation
- The relative importance of product innovation in a sector to be positively
associated with its R&D and patent intensity
- Negatively associated with proxy measures of the scale and complexity of its
process technology (its capital/labour ratio, average size of production
plant, or sales concentration ratios).
- Appendix Table11 : E1, E2, E3
24
2-2. Summary
Analytical implication
 The locus of process innovation
- Supplier-dominated firms will be small in size and innovations to come by
definition from suppliers
- In sectors with production intensive firms and plan to be large in size, and
a high proportion of process technology to be generated in-house
- Appendix Table11 : E4
25
2-2. Summary
Analytical implication
 Diversification
- The relative importance of upstream(i.e. vertical) technological diversifications into
sectors supplying equipment is likely to be negatively associated with R&D intensity
- Positively associated with the scale and complexity of production technology
- understand the links at the level of the firm between firm strategy and R&D strategy
- Appendix Table11 : E5
26
2-2. Summary
Future perspectives
 Needs to be tested on the basis of complete sectoral coverage of
the characteristics of innovations in Britain.
 Needs to be modified and extended
 Have a variety of uses for policy makers and analysts
 Turn out to have more powerful uses
 Contain one obvious and important warning for both practitioners of
policies for technical change, and academic social scientists concerned
with is conceptualisation.
27
2-2. Discussion
Adoption in recent technology trend
 Archbugi, D.(2001), Pavitt’s Taxonomy sixteen years on : A Review Article
[FIGURE] Phases of Capitalist Development and Pavitt’s Categories of Firms
 Is it possible to adopt in recent technology trend?
28
2-2. Discussion
Applying the Pavitt taxonomy
 Laursen, K. & Meliciani V. (1999),
The Importance of Technology
based Inter-sectoral Linkages for
Market Share Dynamics
[Category of Firm]
• Supplier dominated(SDOM)
• Scale intensive(SCAI)
• Specialised suppliers(SPEC)
• Science based(SCIB)
29
2-2. Discussion
Applying the Pavitt taxonomy
 IPC(International Patent Classification) & KSIC(Korean Standard Industrial Classification)
Supplier dominated
(SDOM)
Specialised suppliers
(SPEC)
섬유제품 제조업
특수기계 제조업
[Category of Firm]
의복액세서리 및 모피제품 제조업
전기장비 제조업
• Supplier dominated(SDOM)
가죽, 가방 및 신발 제조업
측정 및 제어기기 제조업
목재 및 나무제품 제조업
광학기기 제조업
펄프, 종이 및 종이제품 제조업
시계 제조업
코크스, 연탄 및 석유정제품 제조업
전구 및 조명장치 제조업
비금속 광물제품 제조업
전기, 가스, 증기 및 수도사업
농림어업
컴퓨터 프로그래밍 및 정보서비스업
• Scale intensive(SCAI)
• Specialised suppliers(SPEC)
• Science based(SCIB)
광업
Scale intensive
(SCAI)
Science based
(SCIB)
음식료품 제조업
기초화학물질 제조업
담배 제조업
살충제 및 기타 농약 제조업
인쇄 및 기록매체 복제업
잉크, 페인트, 코팅제 및 유사제품 제조업
고무제품 및 플라스틱제품 제조업
의약용 물질 및 의약품 제조업
1차 금속 제조업
세제, 화장품 광택제 제조업
금속가공제품 제조업
그외 기타 화학제품 제조업
자동차 제조업
화학섬유 제조업
기타 운송장비 제조업
사무기기, 컴퓨터 제조업
가구 및 기타 제품 제조업
전자부품 제조업
통신장비 제조업
영상 및 음향기기 제조업
의료용 기기 제조업
source : 특허분류와 한국표준산업분류 연계표 작성에 관한 연구(발췌)
30
2-2. Discussion
Applying the Pavitt taxonomy
 GICS(Global Industry Classification Standard)
[Category of Firm] Supplier dominated(SDOM), Scale intensive(SCAI), Specialised suppliers(SPEC), Science based(SCIB)
경제섹터
산업군
Pavitt Taxonomy
경제섹터
에너지
소재
에너지
소재
자본재
상업전문서비스
운송
자동차 및 부품
내구소비재 및 의류
소비자 서비스
미디어
SDOM
SCIB
건강관리
산업재
자유소비재
SCAI
SCAI
SCAI/SDOM
필수소비재
Pavitt Taxonomy
건강관리서비스 및 장비
제약 및 생명과학
은행
다각화된 금융
보험
부동산
소프트웨어 및 IT서비스
하드웨어 및 IT장비
반도체 및 반도체장비
SCIB/SPEC
SCIB
통신서비스
통신서비스
SCIB
유틸리티
유틸리티
금융
정보기술
SCIB
소매
음식료 소매
음식료 담배
가정 및 개인용품
산업군
SCAI
SPEC
SCIB
SCIB
source : 한국증권선물거래소(www.krx.co.kr)
31
2-2. Discussion
Source of Innovation(Technology push vs. Demand pull)
 Giada Di Stefano, G. D et al.(2012), Technology push and demand pull perspectives
in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions,
Research Policy, 41, 1283-1295
- a detailed review of academic articles dealing with the sources of innovation
 Factor 1(Technology and Competences for Innovation)
 Factor 2(New Product Development and Market Learning)
 Factor 3(Demand and User Innovation)
 Factor 4(systems of innovation & the system perspective centered on customers).
 Factor 5(Technology Diffusion and Adoption)
 What is your perspectives
in your interesting
fields/sectors?
32
<session 1 : overview of the field>
Kuhn, T. S.(1970),
The Structure of scientific revolutions(2d ed.). Chicago :
University of Chicago Press, [Chapter 2 and 7]
발표자 : 이연화
33
2-3. Summary :
Chapter2. The route of normal science
Normal science
 정상과학: 과거의 하나 이상의 과학적 성취에 확고히 기반을 둔 연구 활동
 성취: 몇몇 특정 과학자 사회가 일정 기간 동안 과학의 한 걸음 나아간 활동을
위한 기초를 제공하는 것으로 인정하는 것
- 교재 : 자연학, 알마게스트, 프린키피아, 광학, 전기학, 화학, 지질학 등
 역할: 이런 책들과 다수의 여타 저작이 일정 시기 동안은 연구 분야에서의 합당한
문제들과 방법들을 연구자의 다음 세대에게 묵시적으로 정의해주는 역할
34
2-3. Summary :
Chapter2. The route of normal science
Paradigm
 개념 : 과학적 인식-이론-관습-사고-관념-가치관 등이 결합된 총체적인 틀
또는 개념의 집합체
 패러다임의 획득과 그것이 허용하는 보다 심원한 연구 형태의 획득은 어느
주어진 과학 영역의 발전에서 성숙의 징조
 두 가지 특징을 가진 Achievement
• 과학 활동의 경쟁 방식을 바꿀 수 있는 획기적인 것
• 모든 유형의 문제들에 대해서 새로운 해석이 가능하도록 열려 있는 것
35
2-3. Summary :
Chapter2. The route of normal science
Paradigm
 의의
- 과학 활동을 수행하기 위한 과학자의 사전 준비의 역할
- 공유된 paradigm안에서의 동일한 규칙과 표준 제시
- 물리학에서의 paradigm의 전환은”과학혁명” 하나의 패러다임으로부터 다른
패러다임으로의 연속적인 이행은 성숙된 과학에서의 통상적인 발달 양상
예
- 프톨레마이오스의 천문학
- 아리스토텔레스의 역학
- 입자광학
36
2-3. Summary :
Chapter7.Crisis and Emergence of Scientific Theories
Paradigm 변화
 “과학혁명은… 하나의 Paradigm이 이와 양립 불가능한 다른 새로운
Paradigm에 의해 전체적 또는 부분적으로 대체되는 비축적적인 변화의
에피소드를 가리킨다”
 이러한 과정을 Normal science의 성과누적을 통해 기존 패러다임이 깨어지면서
경쟁적인 새로운 패러다임이 나타나는 것으로 설명
- 기존의 표준 이념이나 방법에 대한 포기
- 이전 paradigm의 구성 요소를 다른 것으로 대치
 현상에 대한 관심
- 이론 변화의 선수 조건
- 새로운 이론이 출현하게 되면, 대규모의 패러다임의 파괴와 normal science 및
기술상의 주요 변동이 발생하게 되어 불안정한 이론 선행 시기가 나타나게 됨
- 새로운 이론은 정상적 문제 풀이 활동에서의 현저한 실패 이후 출현, 결국 이상
현상이나 위기는 “paradigm”이 바뀌어야 할 때라는 것을 가리키는 지표
37
2-3. Summary :
Chapter7.Crisis and Emergence of Scientific Theories
Paradigm 변화의 예
 코페르니쿠스
1) 기술상의 퍼즐 출이 활동의 붕괴
2) 달력 개혁에 대한 사회적 압력,
3) 유의미한 역사적 요소
 라부아지에의 산소 이론의 탄생에 선행했던 위기
1) 기체화학의 융성과 질량 관계에 대한 의문:18세기 화학자들은 공기가 화학
반응에서의 활성 성분임에 틀림없다는 것을 차츰 깨닫게 되었음
2) 1756년에 이르러 조지프 블랙이 고정된 공기(이산화탄소)는 언제나 보통
공기와는 구별된다는 것을 보여주었을 때, 두 가지 기체 시료는 오직
그 불순물에서만 차이가 나는 것으로 간주되었음
 상대성 이론의 탄생으로의 길을 열어주었던 물리학에서의 19세기 말의
위기에 대한 것
- 그들은 절대 위치와 절대 운동은 뉴턴의 체계에서는 전혀 아무런 구실을
하지 못한다는 것을 증명할 수 있었다. 19세기 말 수십 년 도안 물리학의
실제에 전혀 새로운 관계를 맺게 될 때 비로소 부활되었던 것임
38
2-3. Discussion
정상과학(normal science)와 패러다임(paradigm)의 개념에 어떤
구별이 있는지?
 정상과학은 과거의 하나 이상의 과학적 성취에 확고히 기반을 둔 연구 활동을
뜻하고 정상과학의 성취는 과학 활동의 경재 방식으로부터 끈질긴 옹호자들의
무리를 떼어 낼 만큼 전대미문이고 동시에 모든 유형의 무제들을 연구자들의
재편된 그룹이 해결하도록 남겨 놓을 만큼 상당히 융통성이 있었다.
 이 두 가지 특성을 띠는 성취를 패러다임이라고 부른다….
패러다임을 설명 할 때 모두 과학자들의 연구과정의 흐름을 논리적으로
표현했다고 하는데 그렇다면 패러다임은 과학분야에서만 나타나는
현상인가?
39
2-3. Discussion
패러다임은 시대를 지배하는 총체적 틀인데 정상연구가 진행되다 보면
기존 패러다임의 오류를 수정하고자 새로운 패러다임이 나타나는데
어느 범위까지 인정 받아야 패러다임이라 할 수 있는가?
새로운 이론은 정상적 문제 풀이 활동에서의 현저한 실패를 본 후에야
비로소 출현했다. 이는 우리가 논문 연구를 할 때 선행 연구들에만
의거하지 말고 그것의 부족한 점을 찾고 그것을 바탕으로 해야 새로운
무엇인가가 나올 수 있다고 한다. 이러한 관점에 동의하는가?
Paradigm shift와 Technological Innovation 사이의 유사성과 차별성을
어떻게 설명할 수 있을까?
40
<session 1 : overview of the field>
Van de Ven, a. H.(1986),
Central Problems in the management of innovation,
Management Science, 32(5), 590-607
발표자 : 이연화
41
2-4. Summary :
Introduction
1980’s
 In the wake of a decline in American productivity and obsolescence of its
infrastructure
 The need for understanding and managing innovation
 Stimulating innovation in popular books, Ouchi(1981),Pascale and Athos(1981)
 30chief executive officers public and private firms
1. How can a large organization develop an maintain a culture of
innovation and entrepreneurship
2.What are the critical factors in successfully launching new organizations?
3.How can a manager achieve balance?
42
2-4. Summary :
Introduction
Innovation is to understand the factors that facilitate and inhibit,
the factors include ideas, people, transactions and context over time.
43
2-4. Summary
: Factors(1)
New ideas-Human problem of managing attention
 Innovation Ideas
- is a new idea, which may be a recombination of old ideas, a scheme that
challenges the present order, a formula, or a unique approach which is perceived
as new by the individuals involved(Zaltman, Duncan, and Holbwk1973)
- technical innovations(new technologies, products, services)
- administrative innovations(new procedures, policies, organizational forms)
 “innovations” or ”mistakes”
- (1)How and why certain innovative ideas gain good currency?
- (2)How and why people pay attention to only certain new ideas and ignore?
44
2-4. Summary
: Factors(2)
People-Process problem in managing new ideas
into good currency
 The management of ideas
- People become attached to ideas
over time through a social-political
process of pushing and riding their
ideas into good currency.
 Limitations to inertia and premature abandonment of some ideas
① There tends to be a short-term problem orientation in individuals and
organizations, and a façade of demonstrating progress.
② Inventory of ideas is seldom adequate for the situation
③ Even more basic problem is the management of attention
45
2-4. Summary
: Factors(2)
People-Process problem in managing new ideas
into good currency
 The management of attention
- A more realistic view of innovation should begin with an appreciation of the
physiological limitations of human beings to pay attention to nonroutine issues,
and their corresponding inertial forces in organizational life.
 Physiological limitations of human beings
 Group and organizational limitations
 Way to management attention
→ direct personal confrontations with problem
→ triggering the action thresholds of organizational participants
→ channeling the action toward constructive ends
46
2-4. Summary
: Factors(3)
Transactions-Structural problem of managing part
whole relationships
 Proliferation of ideas, people, and transactions over time is a pervasive but little
understood characteristic of innovation process, and with it come complexity
and interdependence-and the basic structural problem of managing
part-whole relations
 An Innovation is a collective achievement.
 The transactions are deals or exchanges
which tie people together within an
institutional framework.
 The organizational design for a process for
integrating all the essential functions,
Fig 2. Linear sequential coupling compared with
simultaneous Coupling of knowledge(Galbraith, 1982)
organizational units, and resources.
47
2-4. Summary
: Factors(3)
Transactions-Structural problem of managing part
whole relationships
 Four inter-related design holographic organizations, principles have been
suggested by Morgan(1983)
1) Self-organizing : To solve its problems within an overall mission and set of
constraints prescribed for the unit by the lager organization.
2) Redundant functions : People develop an understanding of the essential
considerations and constraints of all aspects of the innovation in addition to
chose immediately needed to perform their individual assignments.
3) Requisite variety
Making environmental scanning a responsibility of all unit members.
4) Temporal linkage
Integrating parts of time(past, present, and future events) into an overall
chronology of the innovation process
48
2-4. Summary
: Factors(4)
Institutional context-Leadership and innovation
context
Figure 3. Institutional and technical processes(Lodahl and Mitchell, 1980)
49
2-4. Summary :
Conclusion
From a managerial viewpoint, to understand the process
of innovation
1) How do innovations develop over time?
2) What kinds of problems will most likely be encountered?
3) What responses are appropriate for managing problems
Four basic concepts and four central problems
Three cybernetic principles
50
2-4. Discussion
How can we interpret 4 factors and 4 central problems
in this paper with the structure of scientific revolutions?
51
2-4. Discussion
Recently, many firms conduct open innovation through collaboration with
other innovation actors.
Many researchers interest in performance of cooperation among subjects
participation.
How they do these kinds of cooperation?
52
Implication &
Concluding Discussion
53
3. Implication & Concluding Discussion
User-Led Innovation Model
 Innovation process : User roles in technological innovation
(e.g. : open source software, club community)
 Source of Innovation
Themke, s. and von Hippel, E.(2002), “Customers as Innovators :
A new Way to Create Value”, Harvard Business Review,
54
3. Implication & Concluding Discussion
Human-centered Innovation
 Now? How?
Human
Context
Technology
Human-centered Innovation
55
3. Implication & Concluding Discussion
Interpreting in an open innovation point of view
 Linked to Sectoral patterns of technological innovation
 4 factor and 4 central problems
Chesbrough(2003; 2006)
56
Thank you
57