Nikolaos
Karanassios MBA[1], Jaques
Guenot Ph.D[2]., Ioannis
Chamalis[3]
Innovation
is considered to be a new use of established procedures of approaching the
citizens’ demand for improvement of the quality of life. The result is
innovative products, services, production, distribution and administration.
All
systems involved in innovation creation and promotion, seek innovative actions
to be taken, in order to succeed in their tasks. Enterprises use several tools
aiming to innovation mining among their employees, in the form of quality
circles, brainstorming and motivation. They also establish contacts with higher
education and research institutes with the hope to find innovation there.
Supporting systems are based on innovation assessment, promotion and technology
transfer.
Questions
accompany all established routines for innovation creation and discovery.
Persons are carrying innovation in their minds. Persons have strong ambitions
as well as weaknesses. It is them that are meant to stimulate, in order to
reveal their innovative ideas, in exchange of inspiring their personal goals
achievement.
Several
formal recognitions of origin of innovation are currently being used. From
company appreciation and promotion to personal patent. Bridging academia with
the enterprises balance, between cost and effectiveness, is challenging and is
relating both sides; firms and academia.
All
involved parties; firms, academia and public administration, may have to create
the most favorable environment in order to facilitate persons to express, not
just create, innovative ideas, to evaluate them in terms of feasibility, to
calculate their profitability and promise in return whatever innovators expect
to be a desired award of their efforts and offer.
A survey
is in course, trying to put personal against institutional incentives and see
innovation under the reflections of common and conflicting interests.
Conclusions are expected to follow the degree of acceptance of the methodology
of innovation creation, by both public bodies and enterprises, in their search
of innovative policies and actions concerning innovation itself.
Keywords: innovation,
Patent, motivation
Globalisation
of competition and the evolution of financial markets have taken economic
activities under a different framework than the one we knew as the
establishment for the last decades.
Traditional
methods of local development have left behind protectionism and artificial
barriers to the world trade have been lifted long ago. The financial needs for
global marketing, as well as mass production able to meet global demand,
underlined the significance of the financial markets, transforming the
production and distribution system into a credit system.
The
incorporation of digital electronics with their accompanying software to all,
products, distribution systems and production itself, under the umbrella of the
financial markets, namely the “new economy”, gives the impression that things
have drastically changed. From another point of view, there are no differences,
since consumers are still seeking the maximum satisfaction from whatever they
give their money for and remain producers themselves either as workers or as
entrepreneurs, trying to maximize their revenue, in other words their source of
money.
On the
other hand, savings are the only source of capital that covers the expenses of
enterprise creation and evolution, are driven to the most profitable
destinations, taking into consideration the risk involved.
Widening
the borders of capital movement, increasing the size of the enterprises and
incorporating fast and secure communication, seem to make the economic
activities more sophisticated and complicated. The intrinsic relations between
the various factors remain the same, while the instability of the international
financial markets give enough ground to the reconsideration of development,
seen as the local creation of wealth.
The
questions about the ability to create wealth in places where the global finance
shows little or no interest at all, are getting the same answer; innovation.
Policymakers,
at least for two decades in Europe, are trying to stimulate innovation and
motivate all, entrepreneurs, researchers and local authorities alike, to deploy
innovation and use it as an instrument of development. Subsidies depend on
innovation as it is presented by the applicants for national or European grants
and then are being evaluated by bureaucrats. On the other hand, innovators, in
need to meet the global market demand with an adequate company size, address
themselves to the global financiers, facing the same bureaucrats, sometimes
even the same persons, with identical results. Real innovation, seen as
something that has never been done before the same way, is then considered too
risky by both the financial and institutional bureaucrats, because in their
turn, they are evaluated by the short-term results they achieve.
It has
never been said that innovation creates wealth just because actions taken are
innovative. Innovative actions, either in the productive or the supporting
system, have to be assessed according to the expected results and the
possibility to achieve them.
It is
difficult to have valid date about the acceptance of an innovative action
because it is new and there is no statistical data available. Time series
projection and other statistical methods are not applicable, while
questionnaires are usually answered in an arbitrary way, most of the times and
they do not reflect the real degree of acceptance by the questioned samples.
Even key questions fail to discover the real reaction of the sample, because an
innovation is intangible. The innovative action is then projected at the
imagination of the individuals and each one of them has a different item or
service in mind, answering accordingly.
Observation
of the market reaction to innovation using assimilations or proportions give
little or no indication at all, since innovation is usually disturbing what
people are familiar with.
Most of the
times a market survey gives misleading results, while a desktop analysis seems
to be most appropriate, since innovators know what exactly their product,
service or action will be.
Companies
and public authorities alike use several methods of innovation creation, while
bureaucrats assessing innovation are using standards like cost versus benefit,
risk versus expected revenue, all based on calculations of the expected market,
as shown by surveys.
An
innovative approach of innovation should then take into consideration the
critical components concerned, like motivation of individuals, motivation of
entrepreneurs, assessing system and expected degree of acceptance by the
determinant population, such as consumers, beneficiaries, workers, social
forces and controlling authorities.
Various definitions of innovation concentrate the attention on the various aspects of innovation or it’s use, so there is not a standard definition, which may have a universal application.
Common, in
all definitions, is the aspect of something new, either a natural
characteristic of a product, a production procedure, a sales network or
technique, a new use of an established product or service, or even a new
combination of product/service ensample.
The Webster
dictionary indicates that innovation is:
“The act
of innovating; introduction of something new, in customs, rites, etc
A change
effected by innovating; a change in customs; something new, and contrary to
established customs, manners, or rites”
It is
necessary to distinguish other similar terms, in the sense of their content and
usual application.
Philosophy
seems to be the initial stage of innovation, when seen as a subversive
statement about the nature of things, using a new viewing angle of life. A
philosophic idea is innovative, otherwise cannot be a part of philosophy at
all. It may be confusing, but philosophy is used in all common aspects of
innovation as an underlying thinking process of connecting causes to expected
results in all cases, from technical constructions to marketing techniques.
Theory is
closely connected with philosophy, since the formulation of a hypothesis of the
internal laws of the behavior of either nature or the society is explained in
detail providing an applicable tool to the scientific work and documentation.
Discovery
is frequently confused with innovation. A discovery, seen as the procedure of
revealing the proof of an interconnection between causes and results that have
been stated in a philosophical or theoretical manner, with a clear
interconnection between actions and results, is a potential instrument for
innovation but not innovative itself.
Invention,
seen as the original construction of something that did not exist before, is a
part of innovation. Invention is the usual starting point of innovation.
Innovation
is a marketable commodity, service or know-how. It can be examined as having
separate or accumulative characters of:
The purpose
of innovation is profit creation by all parties involved, the result is the
increment of local wealth, thus improvement of the living standards. Innovation
has always been the driving force, the locomotive of progress, being the
perpetual vehicle of both prosperity and civilization.
Competition,
on one hand and the chaotic infinity of human needs and desires on the other,
describe the environment in which economic subjects operate and live.
Competition
is congenital to human nature (to all living organisms, as theorized) which is
a satisfactory explanation of the economic cycles, as well as the life cycle of
a product or service. Every economic subject is trying to perform better than
others and it is beyond the limits of the present to examine why (there is a
vast collection of literature, from Freud to Argyris).
Enterprises,
in their competitive framework, are trying to innovate their products, in order
to gain the consumer’s attention presenting an alternative way to get more
satisfaction by consuming them, their services, trying to convince the users
that theirs are better than other available, their production procedures,
trying to diminish costs and increase quality and so be cheaper, better or
both, their marketing methods, trying to better meet the consumer desires,
their financial scheme, in order to exploit the credit system and their
organization, for a better performance.
Thriving to
perform better than competitors, enterprises are seeking as much innovation as
it is not risky for their established products, markets and profits. This is
usually represented as a reaction to change, common to all profitable
operations. Changes are not necessarily innovative, while innovation means a
change itself. Reaction to change includes all parties, entrepreneurs,
financiers, workers and managers alike. Reaction to change is obviously also
reaction to innovation, since any change means to take the risk of failure,
everyone is trying to avoid it. In the same time, any change is a turbulence of
the equilibrium of conflicting interests with unpredictable results.
The market
forces, even under protectionism, are feeding ambitions and drive innovation to
competition with the establishment. Business ideas are created continuously,
either as an imitation of success cases or as innovations. Investors are trying to balance between the
risk of innovation and the security of the establishment. The less an
investment comprises risk the lower are the expected revenues. The more an
investment is based on speculations about the market reaction, the higher are
the expected revenues, while this speculation is not based on documented
forecasts but just on a hypothesis which may or not be verified. Uncertainty is
not attractive to common investors, so speculation, when it is successful,
brings back as high profits as much as the risk of failure, because of the lack
of competitors in the initial phase. When it proves to be successful, many
imitators follow, but innovators still have an advantage, having already created
an establishment.
It is
common to enterprises that have introduced innovation to become conservative
after their success, creating barriers to further innovation and react to any
change. Competitors, on the other hand, appear all the time, trying to place
themselves in the market, with a competitive advantage over the established
enterprises.
Managers
are aware of the need of innovation or at least diversification, while
investors and financiers alike prefer to keep the enterprise position and when
they adopt innovation they do it avoiding the risk of failure. Mergers, hostile
take-overs and other similar methods are commonly used in order to satisfy the
necessity of innovation without the risk. Innovation is still there and
innovators are still revolutionizing the established market terms, undermining
the domination of all competitors, even the best positioned.
Economic
history has an endless series of examples collapses of colossal enterprises
reluctant to innovation, as well as miniature enterprises that became main
players after introducing innovation. History observation shoes that drastic
innovation is introduced by rather small investments than market dominating
ones.
Established
firms use several methods of innovation creation, such as:
They also
buy innovation, instead of creating it, wherever it is available, using methods
such as:
Research
and Development is concentrating attention of businesses, as well as the
government, as the source of innovation, because innovation is widely connected
to technology.
Inventions
are certainly necessary to the innovation of products and production systems,
yet innovation is closer to a new use of existing knowledge, than the
application of newly created knowledge. It all starts from a business idea, in
the sense of an expected number of economic units (consumers, enterprises or
public authorities) ready to pay in order to get the new product or service,
obtain it in a new way, with unusual terms of payment, in a faster delivery
time or with most desired standard characteristics, otherwise called quality.
Employees,
managers, engineers, external collaborators, researchers and academic personnel
are all individuals coming across innovative ideas. In spite of their
connection or bounds to the enterprise, research institute or education unit,
they all have the primary will to exploit the innovation which their brain has
created. Some of them obtain a patent in order to safeguard their intellectual
property and then start to market their idea. Most of those market ideas are
never applied, for reasons that exceed the purposes of the present.
Innovation
is a product of human activity. It is brainpower and knowledge that permit its
creation, while “dreaming” of it is the real generating procedure. Being a
product it has a commercial value, its commercialization means risk to lose the
invested time and effort together with the money needed to finance expenses of
going into detail, write proposals, meet the potential investors (or receivers)
or obtain a patent and risk taking means expecting profits.
A
“bottoms-up” approach of innovation creation may start from the fact that
innovation is a product, so producers are the offer side, while investors are
the demand side. This is applicable in
all cases, from company employees to public servants, from politicians to
academic researchers, from students to company managers and from housewives to
academic teachers.
Traditional
methods of innovation creation and implementation may need a revision using the
same procedures, which are being used for the creation of innovative products
and / or innovative production and marketing methods. Innovation as a result of
creativity is now the major concern of management. In the traditional
authoritative approach, it is the manager’s ability to promote the innovation
concept among the people working under his guidance. It is his responsibility
to assess the innovative ideas and adopt or drop them. Creativity and
innovative orientation is then a result of leadership, effective in some
extend.
Innovative
business ideas need their own marketplace, which cannot be simply invented. The
market rules derive from bridging the conflicting interests of the offer and
demand sides. The demand side is always in search of better offers, while the
offer side is advertising, in order to convince the demand side to buy,
highlighting the most convincing characteristics of their product or service.
Both sides are trying to make a profit out of these transactions. Sellers are
trying to establish long-term maximum margins, while buyers are trying to
maximize their long-term margins with optimal provisions.
Although
the marketplace operates under formal and ethical rules, agreements that
satisfy both the giver and the receiver sides are eligible, whatever their
content. Public authorities and non profit organizations, as well as
enterprises, have to create a marketplace of innovation. The creation itself of
this marketplace may be considered as an innovation. If it will be limited by
bridging offer and demand, then innovation vanishes after its creation. Looking
back at the innovation creation procedures of the enterprises, it would be
rather a continuous innovation creation if the same methods were used, instead
of a static act, even if it is a breakthrough.
Innovation,
when examined as a product, has consumed human effort and money, put at a risky
venture with the hope of a corresponding profit. Procedures that bring to
surface and thus make evident the potential opportunities for the prospective
receivers the creativity results of the individuals need the participation of
the interested parties, givers and receivers, in order to adapt to the
ever-changing expectations.
Brainstorming
is an example of such a way of usage of the methods of innovation creation,
which may lead to innovative procedures. Research is another way of obtaining
similar results. Steering committees are used by social organizations and local
authorities as an instrument of determination of development strategy. They may
be used as the organizers of brainstorming and research about the procedures of
creating innovation in development actions.
Firms
should be aware of the value of the procedures of innovation creation, without
confusing technology and development with it, just because in many cases
technology is needed in order to apply it.
Enterprises
located far from the densely populated centers, such as Serres (Hellas), and
Cosenza (Italia), have no awareness at all about maters concerning innovation
itself. We had to redesign the survey after 65 responses to our questionnaire
made evident that entrepreneurs and managers alike cannot understand the
meaning of innovation, although they innovate. Reports from highly developed
centers, such as Attica and Milan, show a considerably acceptable rate of
recognition of innovation.
It is imperative
to create awareness about innovation to peripheral enterprises; otherwise
economies will end up with complicated logistical problems, if enterprises
flourished only in the central points of the Regions.
On the
other hand, it is the peripheral enterprises ready to adopt innovative action
of innovation creation, as they are “technology consumers” created in regional,
national, European or even global central points. This is because they do not
have any bounds with researchers, either in external institutions or formal
internal divisions. They just can start from scratch and thus setup their
system from a zero base.
Globalization,
knowledge based economy, electronic society and all other components of what is
being called “new economy” are promoted in order to create wealth and
subsequently prosperity to the citizens. These components have at least two
aspects; technological and economic. Basic research is needed as the platform
of future technology. Applied research is needed as the platform of the creation
of new products and / or services, as well as mew manufacturing and
organization methods.
Peripheral
economies should concentrate their efforts to innovation rather than invention,
based on laboratory research executed in the appropriate Institutes. Enterprises
and local authorities in these less developed areas, if they try to create
technological breakthroughs are in a great disadvantage against central
economic entities. Enterprises are after profits and local authorities are
after prosperity and social welfare. Their interests are common as common is
the way of reaching their goals; take innovative actions for innovation
creation.
In almost
all regions of Europe there are institutions, mostly in the form of NGO, with a
balanced participation of local authorities, financial institutions and
enterprises. The European Commission has greatly facilitated the creation of
such institutions, as National Documentation Centres, EC Business and
Innovation Centers, Euro-Info Centers, just to name a few. Their tasks are to
support the innovative actions of either businesses or local institutions, in
optimizing their efforts. They act as bridges between the various market
actors, helping mutual understanding even in terms of acceptable rewards. This
way, they may be used as the platform of development of a possible “innovation
marketplace” where individuals will meet entrepreneurs and local authority
personalities with a firm goal; to end up with a plan of actions.
Higher
education institutions have a crucial role to play. They have attracted and
recruited most of the peripheral brainpower, which has been driven to basic
research motivated by academic incentives. It is not surprising that the
academia personnel is motivated by economic incentives, while academia itself
creates bureaucratic obstacles. This happens because academia is
uni-disciplinary and concentrated in the scientific aspect, which has to be
controlled otherwise academia, the compass to the future risks to lose
credibility, if control of its personnel actions is lost. Once the innovation
content and process is clear, it becomes evident that it is multidisciplinary,
with an equilibrium between scientific coherence, feasibility compromises,
profit expectations, cost/benefit consideration, social impact and
collaborative in terms of scientific fields, personal, scientific and
institutional authority, authenticity and superiority.
Involved
parties will be rewarded according to their degree of acceptance of the
contribution of all the others.
[1] |
European Business & Innovation
Centres Network (1995) “Technical Guides” on Business Planning,
Brussels |
[2] |
Hawryszkiewycz Igor (1997), “Designing
the Networked Enterprise”, Artech House Inc, London |
[3] |
Ivanchev D., Kydros D.,
Pantazopoulos S., (1999), “Applications of mathematics in engineering and
economics”, Sozopol, Bulgaria |
[4] |
Jolly Vijay (1997), “Commercializing
New Technologies”, Harvard Business School Press, Boston |
[5] |
Kao John, (1997) “The Art and
Discipline of Business Creativity”, Harper Collins Business, London, |
[6] |
Karanassios Vasilis (1993), “Inventing the future”, Invited lecture,
University of Waterloo, Nov. 8, |
[7] |
Mansell Robin and When Uta, (1998)
“Knowledge Societies: Information Technology for Sustainable Development”,
Oxford University Press Inc, New York |
[8] |
Miles Raymond and Snow Charles,
(1978) “Organizational strategy structure and process”, Mc Graw-Hill,
Tokyo |
[9] |
Segal H. Harvey (1989), “Corporate
Makeover”, Viking, United States of America, |
[10] |
Sharpe-Gordon F. Alexander-Jeffery
J. WilliamBailey V., “Investments”, (1999) Prentice-Hall International
Inc, USA |
[11] |
Silk J. David, (1995) “Harnessing
Technology to Manage Your International Business”, Mc Graw-Hill Book Company, London |
[12] |
Strouthopoulos C., Papamarkos N.
and Chamzas C., (1999) “PLA using RLSA and a Neural Network”, Engineering
Applications of Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.
119-138, |
[13] |
Tomkison L. John, (1999), “The
Enterprise Of Knowledge”, Leader Books, Athens |
[14] |
Wargo C. Mark (1987), “MIS Manager’s Handbook:
Innovative Strategies For Successful Management”, Tab Books Inc |
[15] |
Ηγουμενάκης Ν.- Παπαθεοδοσίου Θ, (1997) Περιφερειακή Ανάπτυξη Και
Αγορά Εργασίας, Ινστιτούτο Τεχνολογικής Εκπαίδευσης, |
[16] |
Κύδρος Δ. - Πανταζόπουλος Σ., (1999) “Τεχνολογία Η/Υ και σύγχρονες
τάσεις Μηχανολογίας”, Συνέδριο «Ανοικτή και εξαποστάσεως εκπαίδευση και
Περιφερειακή Ανάπτυξη», Ηγουμενίτσα 13-14/12/1999, ISBN 960-8583-0-6 |
[1] Nikolaos Karanassios, MBA
(Bocconi), born in Em.Papas Serres, 1954, As. Professor of TEI of Serres,
Faculty of Economics and Business, Department of Business Administration, CEO
of the Serres EC Business and Innovation Centre, Phone +30/321/49229, Fax:
+30/321/45716, E-mail: nk@teiser.gr
[2] Jaques Guenot Ph.D., born in Switzerland
1942, Professor of Geometry at the Universita’ della Calabria, Vice president
of the “Centro Ingegneria Economica e Sociale”, Phone: +39/0984/494638, Fax:
+39/0984/4475, E-mail: guenot@libero.it
[3] Ioannis Chamalis, Engineer, born in
Thessaloniki 1970, Public Relations at the Serres EC Business and Innovation
Centre, Phone and Fax: +30/321/64849, E-mail: chamalis@bic.the.forthnet.gr