The changing nature of innovation networks in Taiwan: From imitation to innovation?

Taiwan is embarking on a new phase in its approach to building its national innovative capacity, through building the infrastructure for a biotechnology industry. Rather than acting as a “fast follower” of trends developed elsewhere, Taiwan is seeking to evolve the elements of a national innovation system, including upgrading the role of universities in providing fundamental R&D, in providing incubators for new, knowledge-based firms, in developing new funding models, and in establishing new biotech-focused science parks. This paper reviews the progress achieved to date, and the prospects for this new phase in Taiwan’s transition from imitation to innovation

The organisation of innovation: collaboration, cooperation and multifunctional groups in UK and German manufacturing

Marked differences exist between the institutional and social context for innovation in the UK and Germany. The question addressed here is how these different contexts affect the objectives and organisation of innovation in UK and German manufacturing. In particular, the paper examines the extent to which UK and German plants engage in inter-plant collaboration and cooperation and multifunctional working as part of their innovative activity, and explores the reasons for differences in these patterns of involvement. The investigation is based on a large-scale, comparative survey of manufacturing plants in the two countries. In Germany, institutional and social norms are found to encourage collaborative inter-plant innovation, but aspects of the German skills training and industrial relations systems make the adoption of more flexible internal systems more difficult. In the UK, by contrast, the more adversarial nature of inter-firm relations makes it more difficult to establish external collaborations based on mutual trust, but less restrictive labour market structures make it easier for UK plants to adopt multifunctional working. This is linked to differences in attitudes to the property rights and transaction cost problems inherent in innovation.

Methodology choices and the construction of facts:some implications from the sociology of scientific knowledge

This paper has two objectives: first, to provide a brief review of developments in the sociology of scientific knowledge (SSK); second to apply an aspect of SSK theorising which is concerned with the construction of scientific knowledge. The paper offers a review of the streams of thought which can be identified within SSK and then proceeds to illustrate the theoretic constructs introduced in the earlier discussion by analysing a particular contribution to the literature on research methodology in accounting and organisations studies. The paper chosen for analysis is titled “Middle Range Thinking”. The objective of this paper is not to argue that the approach used in this paper is invalid, but to seek to expose the rhetorical nature of the argumentation which is used by the author of the paper.

The return of the Prince of Denmark: a survey on recent developments in the economics of innovation

It is well known that innovation is the engine that drives the growth machine of modern capitalist economies. Therefore, not surprisingly, substantial attention has been devoted by economists to the process behind the production of innovations. Three areas have recently emerged as relevant in the field. These are: the impact of spillovers on productivity; the different forms of R&D cooperation and the role of patents in fostering innovations when these are cumulative. In this paper I summarise the relevant literature in these three areas by discussing where the current literature stands and what are its future developments.

HRM as a predictor of innovation

There is growing evidence available to suggest that HR practice is an important predictor of organisational performance. In this article, we argue that HR practices also have the potential to promote organisational innovation. We describe a longitudinal study of 22 UK manufacturing companies and examine the relationship between such practices and product and technological innovation. Results reveal that training, induction, team working, appraisal and exploratory learning focus are all predictors of innovation. Contingent reward, applied in conjunction with an exploratory learning focus, is positively associated with innovation in technical systems. Furthermore, training, appraisal and induction, combined with exploratory learning focus, explain variation between companies in product and technological innovation above and beyond the main effects observed. © 2006 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

The limits of open innovation:openness and (quasi-)markets in the organization of innovation

Recent studies have stressed the importance of ‘open innovation’ as a means of enhancing innovation performance. The essence of the open innovation model is to take advantage of external as well as internal knowledge sources in developing and commercialising innovation, so avoiding an excessively narrow internal focus in a key area of corporate activity. Although the external aspect of open innovation is often stressed, another key aspect involves maximising the flow of ideas and knowledge from different sources within the firm, for example through knowledge sharing via the use of cross-functional teams. A fully open innovation approach would therefore combine both aspects i.e. cross-functional teams with boundary-spanning knowledge linkages. This suggests that there should be complementarities between the use cross-functional teams with boundary-spanning knowledge linkages i.e. the returns to implementing open innovation in one innovation activity is should be greater if open innovation is already in place in another innovation activity. However, our findings – based on a large sample of UK and German manufacturing plants – do not support this view. Our results suggest that in practice the benefits envisaged in the open innovation model are not generally achievable by the majority of plants, and that instead the adoption of open innovation across the whole innovation process is likely to reduce innovation outputs. Our results provide some guidance on the type of activities where the adoption of a market-based governance structure such as open innovation may be most valuable. This is likely to be in innovation activities where search is deterministic, activities are separable, and where the required level of knowledge sharing is correspondingly moderate – in other words those activities which are more routinized. For this type of activity market-based governance mechanisms (i.e. open innovation) may well be more efficient than hierarchical governance structures. For other innovation activities where outcomes are more uncertain and unpredictable and the risks of knowledge exchange hazards are greater, quasi-market based governance structures such as open innovation are likely to be subject to rapidly diminishing returns in terms of innovation outputs.

An exploration of the determinants of innovation:the top management team, organisational climate and organisational learning

Some researchers argue that the top team, rather than the CEO, is a better predictor of an organisation’s fate (Finkelstein & Hambrick, 1996; Knight et al., 1999). However, others suggest that the importance of the top management team (TMT) composition literature is exaggerated (West & Schwenk, 1996). This has stimulated a need for further research on TMTs. While the importance of TMT is well documented in the innovation literature, the organisational environment also plays a key role in determining organisational outcomes. Therefore, the inclusion of both TMT characteristics and organisational variables (climate and organisational learning) in this study provides a more holistic picture of innovation. The research methodologies employed includes (i) interviews with TMT members in 35 Irish software companies (ii) a survey completed by managerial respondents and core workers in these companies (iii) in-depth interviews with TMT members from five companies. Data were gathered in two phases, time 1 (1998-2000) and time 2 (2003). The TMT played an important part in fostering innovation. However, it was a group process, rather than team demography, that was most strongly associated with innovation. Task reflexivity was an important predictor of innovation time 1, time 2). Only one measure of TMT diversity was associated with innovation - tenure diversity -in time 2 only. Organisational context played an important role in determining innovation. This was positively associated with innovation - but with one dimension of organisational learning only. The ability to share information (access to information) was not associated with innovation but the motivation to share information was (perceiving the sharing of information to be valuable). Innovative climate was also associated with innovation. This study suggests that this will lead to innovative outcomes if employees perceive the organisation to support risk, experimentation and other innovative behaviours.