Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Technological innovation.
Статті в журналах з теми "Technological innovation"
Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями
Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Technological innovation".
Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.
Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.
Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.
1
TORUGSA, NUTTANEEYA (ANN), and WAYNE O’DONOHUE. "MANAGING KNOWLEDGE-RELATED BARRIERS TO TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION THROUGH EXPLOITATIVE AND EXPLORATIVE ORGANISATIONAL STRATEGIES." International Journal of Innovation Management 23, no. 04 (May 2019): 1950035. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s136391961950035x.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study uses data from a sample of 31,948 European innovating firms to examine the impact that knowledge-related barriers to technological innovation have on the link between the level of such innovation and firm performance, and, to investigate the role of “exploitative” and “explorative” organisational strategies in moderating such impact. Exploitative strategies are measured by the level of organisational innovations, and exploratory strategies are measured by the level of methods for fostering workplace creativity. Using moderated hierarchical regression, the results reveal a negative effect of the interaction between technological innovation and related knowledge constraints on firm performance. They also reveal that the negative interaction effect becomes positive at high levels of organisational innovations and creativity-fostering methods. The study findings thus indicate the need for managers of technologically innovative firms to implement both exploitative and explorative organisational strategies. Doing so could help minimise the negative effects of knowledge-related barriers to technological innovation, and in turn promote innovation-based competitiveness and business success.
2
Weng, Calvin S. "Innovation Intermediaries in Technological Alliances." International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 14, no. 02 (March 22, 2017): 1740013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0219877017400132.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Technological alliances play an important role in generating innovations but face the challenge of effective matchmaking when finding suitable partners in “open innovation” among networks of innovating firms. Intermediaries refer to those external mechanisms/institutions that can appropriately support companies in their innovation-related activities. They are frequently used to build a bridge between different competency constraints among companies. The purpose of this paper was to try to understand the role of a firm’s alliances within the context of open innovation. What do innovation intermediaries of collaborative partners contribute? Using the “Strategic Alliance Database” established by the National Science Council (NSC) in Taiwan as a basis, this study empirically explored the brokerage roles in the alliance that intermediaries take on to facilitate technological innovation and an innovation process. By using the technique of two-mode network analysis for social network analysis, this research focused on the question of how a technological alliance creates a platform for firms to execute matchmaking for new and/or relevant partners. The results presented here reveal that brokerage roles can be used to develop collaborations. The strategic position of the intermediary can activate different resources from the ones embedded in an alliance network.
3
Bedau, Mark A., Nicholas Gigliotti, Tobias Janssen, Alec Kosik, Ananthan Nambiar, and Norman Packard. "Open-Ended Technological Innovation." Artificial Life 25, no. 1 (April 2019): 33–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/artl_a_00279.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
We detect ongoing innovation in empirical data about human technological innovations. Ongoing technological innovation is a form of open-ended evolution, but it occurs in a nonbiological, cultural population that consists of actual technological innovations that exist in the real world. The change over time of this population of innovations seems to be quite open-ended. We take patented inventions as a proxy for technological innovations and mine public patent records for evidence of the ongoing emergence of technological innovations, and we compare two ways to detect it. One way detects the first instances of predefined patent pigeonholes, specifically the technology classes listed in the United States Patent Classification (USPC). The second way embeds patents in a high-dimensional semantic space and detects the emergence of new patent clusters. After analyzing hundreds of years of patent records, both methods detect the emergence of new kinds of technologies, but clusters are much better at detecting innovations that are unanticipated and undetected by USPC pigeonholes. Our clustering methods generalize to detect unanticipated innovations in other evolving populations that generate ongoing streams of digital data.
4
Mothe, Caroline, and Thuc Uyen Nguyen Thi. "The link between non‐technological innovations and technological innovation." European Journal of Innovation Management 13, no. 3 (August 3, 2010): 313–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14601061011060148.
Повний текст джерела
5
Woodward, Philip. "Technological Innovation and Natural Law." Philosophia Reformata 85, no. 2 (November 4, 2020): 138–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/23528230-8502a001.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Abstract I discuss three tiers of technological innovation: mild innovation, or the acceleration by technology of a human activity aimed at a good; moderate innovation, or the obviation by technology of an activity aimed at a good; and radical innovation, or the altering by technology of the human condition so as to change what counts as a good. I argue that it is impossible to morally assess proposed innovations within any of these three tiers unless we rehabilitate a natural-law ethical framework. And I offer some moral starting points within such a framework, in connection with innovations of each of the three types.
6
Su, Wan, Xiaobo Xu, Yangchun Li, Francisco J. Martínez-López, and Ling Li. "Technological Innovation." Journal of Global Information Management 26, no. 2 (April 2018): 193–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jgim.2018040109.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The Mobile Internet Information Technology (MIIT) has been widely accepted as one of the most promising technologies in the next decades, having various applications and different value positions. However, few published studies explore and examine the effects of MIIT on community management. Based on the Dramaturgical Theory, this article uses a case study method to get an insightful understanding of MIIT. This article found that the MIIT was used by grid organizations to realize technological innovation and change organizational routines and structures, but eventually it was shaped by them, so this new technology was only able to embed itself into the public service model as a secondary or complementary role.
7
Feller, Irwin, Denis Gray, Trudy Solomon, William Hetzner, Jurgen Schmandt, Robert Wilson, Kenneth Flamm, and Peter Hall. "Technological Innovation." Journal of Policy Analysis and Management 8, no. 1 (1989): 155. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3324440.
Повний текст джерела
8
Croome, Derek. "Technological innovation." Batiment International, Building Research and Practice 18, no. 3 (May 1990): 174–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01823329008727036.
Повний текст джерела
9
Charles, David. "TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION." Australian Journal of Public Administration 49, no. 3 (September 1990): 332–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.1990.tb01976.x.
Повний текст джерела
10
Moon, Chang-Ho. "The Impact of Technological Innovation Orientation and Technological Innovation Capabilities on Technological Innovation Performance." Korean Corporation Management Review 23, no. 6 (December 31, 2016): 47–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.21052/kcmr.2016.23.6.03.
Повний текст джерела
11
Opazo-Basáez, Marco, Ferran Vendrell-Herrero, and Oscar F. Bustinza. "Digital service innovation: a paradigm shift in technological innovation." Journal of Service Management 33, no. 1 (November 18, 2021): 97–120. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/josm-11-2020-0427.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
PurposeExisting innovation frameworks suggest that manufacturing firms have traditionally developed a complementary model of technological innovations comprising process and product innovations (e.g. Oslo Manual). This article presents digital service innovation as a novel form of technological innovation that is capable of enhancing the performance of firms in certain manufacturing industries.Design/methodology/approachDrawing on technological innovation and digital servitization fields of research, this study argues that digital service innovation, in manufacturing contexts, complements traditional sources of technological innovation, so increasing the profit margins of firms. This effect is significant in industries characterized by business-to-business contexts, high presence of link channels and long product life spans (e.g. manufacturing and computer-based industries). Predictions are tested on a unique sample of 423 Spanish manufacturing firms using parametric (t-test) and nonparametric (fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis, fsQCA) approaches.FindingsThe results of this analysis show that a necessary condition so that manufacturing firms can increase profits is the deployment of simultaneous process and product innovations. It also reveals that optimal configuration requires that digital service innovation be undertaken, particularly in machinery and computer-based manufacturing industries. Hence, all three sources of technological innovation are brought together in order to reach the highest levels of company performance. The evidence suggests that technological innovation and digital servitization are closely interrelated in highly innovative manufacturing contexts.Originality/valueThis study's originality and value reside in the fact that it reveals the existence of firms incorporating digital service innovation – a new, technological innovation dimension that challenges existing innovation frameworks – to complement traditional technological innovation sources, namely process and product innovation. Moreover, the study conceptualizes and empirically tests the value-adding role of digital services in firms' technological innovation portfolio.
12
Núñez Jover, Jorge, and José Antonio López Cerezo. "Technological Innovation as Social Innovation." Science, Technology, & Human Values 33, no. 6 (February 13, 2008): 707–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0162243907306707.
Повний текст джерела
13
Pigola, Angélica, Priscila Rezende da Costa, Marcos Rogério Mazieri, and Isabel Cristina Scafuto. "Collaborative innovation: a technological perspective." International Journal of Innovation 10, no. 2 (June 22, 2022): 204–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.5585/iji.v10i2.22256.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Collaborative innovation become one of the most strategy decision across firms and a well-defined phenomenon that became popular among practitioners and researchers (A. S. Cui O’Connor, 2012; Liu et al., 2017). Many theories were considered to explain collaboration phenomena such as resources-based view, organization theory, strategy, information processing theory, the economic theory of complementarities among others (Barney, 1991; Cassiman Veugelers, 2006; Daft Lengel, 1986; Milgrom Roberts, 1995; Tushman Nadler, 1978). However, technology advances provide new variations in collaboration to innovativeness. For example, collaborative activities with suppliers and customers (Karhade Dong, 2021), community source projects (Liu et al., 2017) or collaboration with distant partners (T. Cui et al., 2020), corporate engagement with startups (Shankar Shepherd, 2019), innovation networks (Aarikka-Stenroos et al., 2017), and innovation ecosystems (Granstrand Holgersson, 2020).Collaborative innovation takes over the existence of an inter-organizational activities executed by people that together perform with high level of interdependence something innovative (T. Cui et al., 2020; Davis Eisenhardt, 2011). Some authors (Adner Kapoor, 2010; T. Cui et al., 2020; Rico et al., 2008) highlight that this interdependence is characterized along two dimensions: technological and behavioral. Technological interdependence is linked to knowledge and the exchange of resources for research and development, and behavioral interdependence is associated with the field of communication, social interaction between collaborative actors and the coordination of these relationships to innovate.Other perspectives in the literature explain and theorize about collaborative innovation as knowledge-sharing trajectories (Majchrzak Malhotra, 2016; Trkman Desouza, 2012), or multi-actor collaboration (Torfing, 2019), or building collaborative capabilities (Swink, 2006) among other approaches. In this editorial, we bring some thoughts and idea about collaborative innovation under a technological perspective to incentive researchers to go beyond in innovative technologies research embedded in collaboration.Collaboration efforts also became a common way of firms to enhance innovations and its technological development with clear determinants about their beneficial effects, and therefore, the literature is well stablished in this subject (Pereira et al., 2018). However, collaboration only succeeds when technological resources and capabilities are combined, and parties define jointly how to enhance and use them accordingly (Snow, 2015).Collaborative innovation as a new technological paradigm refers to a network innovation model supported by interactions of multiple parties such as enterprises, universities and research institutions as core elements and government, financial institutions, nonprofit organizations, intermediaries as auxiliary elements (W. Zhang et al., 2021). Notwithstanding, collaboration networks operating in different organizational levels are present in various patterns and characteristics of evolution, they require different actors and capabilities in the network composition to become a remarkable asset in developing technologies to be patented afterwards in some cases (Gomes et al., 2017).In facing of risks of failures during innovative trajectories, firms invest in collaborative initiatives as an attempt to mitigate cost impacts, share responsibilities and greater technical performance in the process of technology lifecycle development. Thus, technological alliances are useful means to attend these goals (Kim Song, 2007). Technological alliances are critical to enable digital transformation and innovation. Briefly, Zhang et al. (2021) highlight technological alliance as a voluntary interfirm cooperation involving codeveloping technologies through sharing and exchanging of these technologies to meet business needs (W. Zhang et al., 2021).The collaborations in various technological domains help to bring heterogenous knowledge, complementary resources, and capabilities for a better innovation performance (Swink, 2006; W. Zhang et al., 2021). Under the perspective that innovation is essentially knowledge creation (Nonaka, 1994), collaborative innovation through a technological perspective may be configured by different activities, processes, or routines of generation, sharing, integration, and utilization of knowledge produced during the innovation process lifecycle (Nonaka, 1994; W. Zhang et al., 2021). Further, this configuration of activities, processes, or routines support the development of evolutionary technological capabilities (Sampson, 2007).In the field of technological innovations, the evolution now is more collaborative in nature (J. Zhang et al., 2019). Collaboration is a trend for technological prosperity. Analyzing collaborative innovation in the literature is a great challenge even if the focus on technologies is defined because various aspects and applications of collaboration to innovate invade the academic literature in many forms. For instance, Zhou and Ren (2021) analyzed low-carbon technology collaborative innovation in industrial cluster; Shen et al. (2021) studied collaborative innovation in supply chain systems; Wan et al. (2022) highlight that blockchain application intensify collaborative innovation through distributed computing, cryptography and game theory; Li and Zhou (2022) researched on the mechanism of Government–Industry–University–Institute collaborative innovation in green technology; and Fan et al. (2022) pointed out that collaborative innovation also may act as a driver to mobilize and coordinate scientific and technological resources within a city, further promoting innovative development among cities.On the other hand, technological collaborative innovations has its own dark side for firms: it has been costly, it demands money, efforts, and time (Torugsa Arundel, 2016; Wegrich, 2019), and, further, it provokes operational adjustments, technological reconfiguration, and legal barriers to overcome to be effective for innovation (McGuire Agranoff, 2011; Vivona et al., 2022). To address this side of collaborative innovation, Vivona et al. (2022) developed the cost theory to systematize all insights from the literature in four main factors: governance, compactness, reliability, and institutionalization to shed light on a broader range of costs for innovation incurred by collaborative arrangements. Governance refers to relationships in hierarchical level and the number of collaborators involved, reliability refers to relationships’ quality; compactness is about the degree of formality in relationships that connect collaborators; and institutionalization that measure what the extent the relationships in practice have been pre-established. This cost perspective may be explored empirically.The decentralization of technological collaborative innovation, its nonlinear, globalized, and networked form transformed its process to more collaborative approaches among entities (Fan et al., 2020). Lopes and Farias (2022) showed that technology tools support the establishment of relationships of trust promoted by leaders committed to well-established goals, being a characteristic of governance that has a positive influence on collaborative innovation processes. Hwang (2020) mentioned that several countries have implemented policies to facilitate technological convergence by supporting collaborative innovations. The author also mentions that collaborative innovation is a crucial strategy to facilitate technological convergence. In sum, firms have been increased collaboration in technological activities and collaboration works as an enabling to learn about turbulent technological change and uncertainties to enhance the ability to deal with innovations (Dodgson, 1993).Technological collaborative innovation is considered essential to promote the flow of resources, knowledge, and technology among entities, considering that innovation is no longer a closed and isolated system. The main premise is technologies do not exist in isolation. Only by exchanging materials, energy, and information with the environment the innovation system be renewed and developed. Therefore, the integrator condition of technological collaborative innovation is also conducive to a more comprehensive disclosure of the collaborative mode and overall performance of technological innovation activities (Fan et al., 2020).Technological collaborative innovation is not a merely coordination of an orderly arrangements of efforts to pursue a common technological purpose (Mooney, 1953), or a merely cooperation to join agreed-on goals into a share comprehension about design systems or reconfigure technological resources (Gulati et al., 2012). It merges cooperation (commitment towards same end) with coordination (complexity to work together effectively) (Vivona et al., 2022). This view may be much more explored by the researchers to enhance the practical aspects of this perspective.In general, collaboration itself does not survive in the face of inevitable behavioral problems which requires an establishment of trust characterized by receptive organizational cultures, community of interest, and continually supplement knowledge for the purpose of collaboration in highly successful technological innovations (Dodgson, 1993). Thus, this can be a new chapter for technological collaborative innovations.
14
Fazel, Hesham, André O. Laplume, and Etayankara Muralidharan. "Technological Innovation and Adopter Self-Construal." International Journal of Innovation and Technology Management 12, no. 04 (July 28, 2015): 1550016. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s0219877015500169.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this paper, we theorize that individuals who value independence and distinctiveness identify more with social identities as a result of adopting sustaining technological innovations. Conversely, individuals who value interdependence may become more independent as a result of adopting disruptive technological innovations. We argue that successive adoptions of technological innovation may expand and contract the breadth of adopters' collective identities. We discuss the implications of this conceptual paper and suggest avenues for future research at the nexus of technological innovation and cultural change.
15
Turker, Duygu, and Y. Serkan Ozmen. "How do social entrepreneurs develop technological innovation?" Social Enterprise Journal 17, no. 1 (January 15, 2021): 63–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/sej-05-2020-0034.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Purpose The present study attempts to analyze how social entrepreneurs (SEs) develop technological innovation in the face of diverse institutional logics, which are embedded in the National Systems of Innovation (NSI). Design/methodology/approach Based on the content analysis of Ashoka Fellows, the study compares SEs in developed and developing countries, which represent strong versus weak NSIs. Findings SEs selectively couple the elements of diverse institutional logics to ensure the resource inflow and legitimacy of their operations. However, SEs particularly at weak NSIs are also decoupling their profit and non-for-profit branches to address conflict among diverse logics. Moreover, the study finds that 12 out of 20 entrepreneurs who identify themselves as technologically innovative did not develop any new technological innovation. Practical implications The study shows that being technologically innovative depends on the acquisition of resources and the management of legitimacy challenges, SEs can diversify their innovations by creating more incremental, architectural and modular innovations to address competing demands among logics. Social implications The study reveals that SEs in weak NSIs interact with multiple institutional logics more frequently than their counterparts in strong NSIs. Although this context leads them to diversify their technological innovation, there is a need for improving the NSIs of SEs in developing countries to facilitate the continuity of resource inflow and ensure the legitimacy of their operations. Originality/value Integrating two complementary theoretical lenses, the study contributes to the literature by exploring the impact of the interaction between logics nested within a supra system and SEs’ ability to develop technological innovation.
16
Hwang, Bang-Ning, and Mu-Yen Hsu. "The impact of technological innovation upon servitization." Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 30, no. 7 (November 4, 2019): 1097–114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jmtm-08-2018-0242.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Purpose For most manufacturing firms, technological innovations are usually the key strategies to gain their competitive advantages. However, competing strategically through service provision is becoming an important strategy for most industries. A growing demand for packaged product and service delivery is blurring the traditional boundaries between manufacturing and service firms. This trend is called “servitization.” Prior research had different perspectives on the relationship between technological innovations and servitization. Some argued that as servitization exerts the innovative convergence of products and services, the possession of appropriate readiness and absorption capacity through technological innovations for a manufacturing firm is critical to the success of servitization. In contrast, some argued that the knowledge gained from developing technological innovations cannot be applied to the creation of services due to the fundamental difference between technology and service. These contradicting arguments motivated the authors to study the relationship between technological innovations and servitization a step further. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach To address the research gap, the authors conducted an empirical study based on the large-scale samples from the second Taiwan Community Innovation Survey (Taiwan CIS). A multivariate logistic regression model was applied in the research. Findings The authors found that different types of technological innovations, namely product innovation and process innovation, have different impacts on servitization. The innovativeness level of the technological innovation moderates the relationship between technological innovation and servitization. Based on the above findings, this research specifically explains the causes of the contradictory results of the prior research. Originality/value The values of this research are twofold. Its academic contribution rests on bridging the literature of innovation and servitization, and on providing a model to clarify the relationships among technological innovation type, level of innovativeness and servitization. Its practical contribution lies in its establishment of a guideline that illuminates manufacturing firms reinforcing service delivery through their existing technological innovation trajectory.
17
Ali Alabbas, Safa, and Refaat Hassan Abdel-Razek. "Mapping and Benchmarking Technological Innovation of Three International Petrochemical Companies." Journal of Innovation Management 4, no. 3 (December 19, 2016): 101–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.24840/2183-0606_004.003_0008.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Mapping technological innovation in organizations is one of the important activities that help companies to identify where organizations are clustering their innovation efforts, and where their unexplored innovation spaces are. Current published innovation mapping models do not take into consideration the comparison and benchmarking between organizations in one model. The objectives of this paper are to map innovation in three international petrochemical companies: Gulf Petrochemical Industries Company (GPIC), Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (SABIC), and Dow Chemical; compare and benchmark the results; and explore the possible areas for their innovation opportunities. An innovation mapping model was developed. Innovation data covering three years (2010-2012), were collected, analyzed and mapped on the model. The results showed that the three companies introduced a total of 194 innovations; 53% by Dow Chemical, 38% by SABIC and 9% by GPIC. Product innovations were the dominant type as they presented 57% of total innovations, where 54% of these were introduced by Dow Chemical, 46% by SABIC, and none by GPIC. Position and paradigm innovations were the least innovation type produced, where only 3% of the total innovations were in position and 1% in paradigm. The results also showed that multi-dimensional innovation represented 23.7% of total innovations, where 67.5% of these were produced by Dow Chemical, 28% by SABIC, and only 4.5% by GPIC. Product-process innovations represented 50% of the total multi-dimensional innovations. During this period only 5.7% of the total innovations were radical innovations; these were all introduced by Dow Chemical. The benchmarking results showed that product innovation was the strength in SABIC; process innovation was the strength in GPIC; and product, radical, product-position, process-position and product-paradigm were the strengths in Dow Chemical. For GPIC there are possible innovation opportunities in product, product-process and process-position innovations; for Dow Chemical and SABIC, in the process area. There are possible opportunities in radical innovation in GPIC and SABIC and plenty of innovation opportunities in the position and paradigm areas for the three companies.
18
David Nizharadze, David Nizharadze. "Development Trends of Technological Innovations in Georgia." Economics 105, no. 11-12 (January 25, 2024): 21–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.36962/ecs105/11-12/2023-21.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The modern business landscape is hard to imagine without developing technological innovations and creating new products through it. The mentioned process acquires special importance related to the activities of innovative start-ups, which have recently become synonymous with entrepreneurship and constantly achievement-oriented strategy, bringing their own, positive impulses to the economic progress of the country. Therefore, developing countries should facilitate the stimulation of high-tech innovations, by establishing creative firms, and commercialization of their products. According to international practice, in Georgia as well, state initiatives to stimulate technological innovations are mainly carried out at the national level. These initiatives, along with the financial support of startups, include participation of creation technology parks, innovation and information centers, innovation laboratories, accelerators, and business incubators, supporting their development. The aim of the present study is to reveal the general trends in the development of technological innovations in Georgia and to evaluate results. Qualitative and quantitative research, induction, deduction, and synthesis methods are used in the research process. Keywords: Technological Innovation, Innovation Policy, Innovative Startup, Commercialization, Startup Ecosystem, Global Innovation Index.
19
Murphy, John W., and Donald D. Davis. "Managing Technological Innovation." Contemporary Sociology 16, no. 6 (November 1987): 811. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2071541.
Повний текст джерела
20
Sun, Yu, Zhaoyuan Yu, Ling Li, Yong Chen, Mikhail Yu Kataev, Haiqing Yu, and Hecheng Wang. "Technological Innovation Research." Journal of Global Information Management 29, no. 6 (November 2021): 1–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jgim.20211101.oa32.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The paper explores the relationship among technological innovation, technological trajectory transition, and firms’ innovation performance. Technological innovation is studied from the perspectives of innovation novelty and innovation openness. Technological trajectory transition is categorized into creative cumulative technological trajectory transition and creative disruptive technological trajectory transition. A structural equation model is developed and tested with data collected by surveying 366 Chinese firms. The results indicate that both innovation novelty and innovation openness positively affects creative cumulative technological trajectory transition as well as creative disruptive technological trajectory transition. Innovation openness and creative disruptive technological trajectory transition both positively affect firms’ innovation performance. However, neither innovation novelty nor creative cumulative technological trajectory transition positively affects firms’ innovation performance. Implications for managers and directions for future studies are discussed.
21
Lind, Mary R. "Technological innovation pull." International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Innovation Management 2, no. 6 (2002): 584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/ijeim.2002.000504.
Повний текст джерела
22
Gobeli, David H., and Warren B. Brown. "Technological Innovation Strategies." Engineering Management Journal 6, no. 1 (March 1994): 17–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10429247.1994.11414768.
Повний текст джерела
23
Porter, Alan L. "Forecasting technological innovation." International Journal of Forecasting 11, no. 3 (September 1995): 493–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0169-2070(95)90033-0.
Повний текст джерела
24
Preece, David. "Managing Technological Innovation." Technovation 21, no. 7 (July 2001): 463. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0166-4972(01)00012-8.
Повний текст джерела
25
Bradshaw, Ralph A., and A. L. Burlingame. "Technological Innovation Revisited." Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 9, no. 11 (October 13, 2010): 2335–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.1074/mcp.e110.005447.
Повний текст джерела
26
Dodgson, Mark. "Generating technological innovation." Research Policy 18, no. 5 (October 1989): 305–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0048-7333(89)90065-6.
Повний текст джерела
27
Daim, T. U., D. F. Kocaoglu, and T. R. Anderson. "Exploring Technological Innovation." Journal of High Technology Management Research 21, no. 1 (January 2010): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.hitech.2010.02.001.
Повний текст джерела
28
Ryu, Hyun-Sun. "Understanding the Effect of Non-Technological Innovation on Technological Innovation and Innovation Success." International Journal of Hybrid Information Technology 9, no. 8 (August 31, 2016): 105–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.14257/ijhit.2016.9.8.10.
Повний текст джерела
29
Ryynänen, Sanna, and Riitta Uusisalmi. "Technological Innovations Through Digital Service Design in Hospital Districts." International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy 12, no. 2 (April 2021): 48–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/ijide.2021040104.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The aim of the study is to describe and increase understanding about digital service design in creating technological innovations in Finnish hospital districts. The data was collected via an open questionnaire during March-August 2019 and analyzed using a combined thematic and narrative analysis. Three distinct themes arose from the research narratives: cooperation, development, and cost. First, the importance of cooperation in the early stages of the service design process, when new technological innovation ideas are developed, was emphasized. Second, the possibilities of digitalization and need for new innovations were taken into account in the development theme. Third, costs define the utilization of an innovation and guide its initial development. If savings and costs are in balance, technological innovations will move forward. Moreover, the findings show that technological innovations in hospital districts progress in a certain pattern, and the utilization of innovations come from the need and pressure to evolve. Keywords Adoption of Innovation, Deployment of Innovation, Digital Service Design, Rogers's Diffusion of Innovation Theory, Service Design, Service Innovation, Specialized Medical Care
30
Ndzana, Martin, Onomo Cyrille, Gregory Mvogo, and Thierry Bedzeme. "Innovation and small and medium enterprises’ performance in Cameroon." Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 28, no. 5 (June 15, 2021): 724–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jsbed-06-2020-0188.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
PurposeThis article attempts to explain performance through the development of innovations within small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Specifically, the authors analyse the determinants of innovation and assess the role of technological and non-technological innovations in performance.Design/methodology/approachBased on a sample of 508 Cameroonian SMEs, the PSM (propensity score matching) technique was used to reduce the selection bias inherent in this type of analysis.FindingsThe results show that technological innovation does not influence significantly the performance of SMEs, whereas non-technological innovation positively influences it. The combination of these two types of innovation leads to better performance than even accentuated development of only one type.Practical implicationsTo improve the performance of SMEs, it is necessary to adopt a comprehensive innovation policy that combines non-technological and technological innovations. In addition, it is important to intensify informations and communication technologies (ICT) promotion policies that contribute to the adoption of innovations within enterprises.Originality/valueThis paper contributes to the literature by showing the role of technological and non-technological innovations in explaining the performance of SMEs. Moreover, unlike the existing work in sub-Saharan Africa, which is limited to testing the innovation–performance relationship, this study also determines the productivity gain generated by innovative firms compared to non-innovative ones.
31
Cua, Francisco, Steve Reames, and Joe Choon Yean Chai. "Relationships in Technological Processes." International Journal of Information Systems and Social Change 4, no. 2 (April 2013): 17–41. http://dx.doi.org/10.4018/jissc.2013040102.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The process model and theory of Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) and the new idea of how technology spreads in an organization are discussed. A comparison between DOI and the Relationship Marketing (RM) theory is examined. Managers who desire innovation or utilize RM theory for third-party change agents are explored. Request for Information (RFI), and Request for Proposal (RFP) utilized by managers that desire technological innovation in the procurement process is discussed. A case study of the commercialization, innovation, feedback-assessment procurement processes of the DOI is conducted in a large public-sector university that procured and implemented an Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. The study revealed that the innovation process was inadequate to explain the outcome. The conclusion reveals that an opportunity or a threat is co-dependent on how each party perceives on or the other’s premise; either premise is irrelevant if one side or the other refuses to foster the relationship.
32
Wang, Ru Fa. "The Regional Evaluation Model of Scientific and Technological Innovation Level." Applied Mechanics and Materials 411-414 (September 2013): 2516–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.411-414.2516.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The evaluation indexes of scientific and technological innovation consist of four grade-one indexes (innovating environment, innovating investment, innovating achievement and innovating bearing form) and thirty grade-two indexes. These indexes reflect the overall level of scientific and technological innovation ability comprehensively, scientifically and effectively. According to these evaluation indexes and based on the fundamentals of fuzzy mathematics, the scientific and technological innovation level of different regions is evaluated. In order to further improve the scientific and technological innovation level of China, this paper aims at promoting construction through evaluation. It also provides a technological supporter for social development.
33
Wadho, Waqar, and Azam Chaudhry. "Innovation in the Textiles Sector: A Firm-Level Analysis of Technological and Nontechnological Innovation." LAHORE JOURNAL OF ECONOMICS 21, Special Edition (September 1, 2016): 129–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.35536/lje.2016.v21.isp.a6.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In a knowledge-based economy, it has become increasingly important to better understand critical aspects of the innovation process such as innovation activities beyond R&D, the interaction among different actors in the market and the relevant knowledge flows. Using a sample of 431 textiles and apparel manufacturers, this paper explores the dynamics of firms’ innovation activities by analyzing their innovation behavior, the extent and types of innovation, the resources devoted to innovation, sources of knowledge spillovers, the factors hampering technological innovation and the returns to innovation for three years, 2013–15. Our results show that 56 percent of the surveyed firms introduced technological and/or nontechnological innovations, while 38 percent introduced new products, these innovations were generally incremental as the majority of innovations were new only to the firm. Furthermore, the innovation rate increases with firm size; large firms have an innovation rate of 83 percent, followed by medium firms (68 percent) and small firms (39 percent). Technologically innovative firms spent, on average, 10 percent of their turnover on innovation expenditure in 2015. Acquisition of machinery and equipment is the main innovation activity, accounting for 56 percent of innovation expenditures. Large firms consider foreign market sources (clients and suppliers) and small firms consider local market sources their key source of information and cooperation. 63 percent of technological innovators cite improving the quality of goods as their most important objective. Lack of available funds within the enterprise is the single most important cost factor hampering innovation, followed by the high cost of innovation. Our results show that 67 percent of the turnover among product innovators in 2015 resulted from product innovations that were either new to the market or new to the firm.
34
Long, Thomas B., Vincent Blok, and Kim Poldner. "Business models for maximising the diffusion of technological innovations for climate-smart agriculture." International Food and Agribusiness Management Review 20, no. 1 (February 7, 2017): 5–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.22434/ifamr2016.0081.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Technological innovations will play a prominent role in the transition to climate-smart agriculture (CSA). However, CSA technological innovation diffusion is subject to socio-economic barriers. The success of innovations is partly dependent on the business models that are used to diffuse them. Within the context of innovations for CSA, the role that innovation providers’ business models play in the successful adoption and diffusion has received limited attention. In this paper we identify critical issues for business models for CSA technological innovations (BMfCSATI). Our results indicate that current BMfCSATIs are not optimised for diffusing CSA technological innovations. Critical business model elements include the value proposition, channels, customer relationships, key resources, key partners, and cost structure. We find a disparity between the views of CSA technological innovation providers and potential users. The paper explores the implications of the results and develops recommendations for CSA technological innovation providers’ business models.
35
KODAMA, Fumio. "Alternative Innovation : Innovation Through Technological Fusion." Journal of the Society of Mechanical Engineers 89, no. 806 (1986): 45–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1299/jsmemag.89.806_45.
Повний текст джерела
36
Indrawati, Henny, Caska, and Suarman. "Barriers to technological innovations of SMEs: how to solve them?" International Journal of Innovation Science 12, no. 5 (November 30, 2020): 545–64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/ijis-04-2020-0049.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Purpose This study aims to analyze the inhibiting factors of small and medium enterprises (SMEs’) technology innovation, supporting institutions for SMEs technology innovation development, SMEs’ technology innovation development model and strategies for developing SMEs in technology innovation. Design/methodology/approach This is a mixed-method research project conducted through a survey of SMEs in Riau Province, Sumatera Indonesia (primarily in the districts of Siak, Kampar and Pelalawan) from April to July 2019. SMEs that have been operating for at least five years were chosen purposively as samples. Based on the requirement, there are 277 entities used in this study. A focus group discussion (FGD) was also conducted to formulate SME models and development strategies in technological innovation. In addition, in-depth interviews and observations were also carried out on technological innovations undertaken by respondents. Findings It was found that there are five inhibiting factors of SMEs’ technology innovation: government support, quality of human resources, funding of technological innovation, economic conditions and business partners. The biggest inhibiting factor remains to be the funding of technological innovation. Therefore SMEs provide independent technological innovation costs to develop technological innovations for business sustainability. Supporting institutions for developing SME technology innovation consist of government institutions, private institutions, financial institutions (banks) and nonbank financial institutions. To survive and excel amid competition, SMEs need to pay attention to technological innovation. The business strategy that needs to be done is to improve services to consumers and improve their attitude toward innovation in the implementation and development of SMEs’ businesses. Research limitations/implications This research is limited to research on the inhibiting factors for SME technology innovation from the aspect of the production sector. This research has not studied various business fields in the trade, service and digital SME sectors. Future studies can reveal factors inhibiting SME technological innovation, except production aspects and various SME business fields. In addition, this study has not analyzed the cost of technological innovation provided by SMEs. Therefore, future studies could also reveal the large costs of technological innovation provided by SMEs. Originality/value This research investigates barriers hindering the SMEs’ technological innovations in Southeast Asia, including Indonesia as a maritime country. It also formulates strategies to reduce the barriers to SME’s technological innovation and contributes to the development of knowledge of technological innovations in SMEs. Moreover, this paper involves investigating government support from a nonfinancial aspect. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this aspect has not been much discussed by studies on innovation at SMEs till now.
37
Tumelero, Cleonir, Roberto Sbragia, and Felipe Mendes Borini. "The Combinative Effect of Organizational and Technological Eco-innovations in R&D-intensive Companies." Environmental Management and Sustainable Development 9, no. 4 (November 24, 2020): 60. http://dx.doi.org/10.5296/emsd.v9i4.17786.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study aims to investigate the influence of organizational and process eco-innovations on the introduction of product eco-innovations in R&D-intensive companies. We covered theory gaps by empirically demonstrating to what extent non-technological and technological eco-innovations are related. We used the Survey method to investigate a sample of Brazilian manufacturers from the electrical and electronics sectors, and we processed the data through Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). The findings of this study evidenced that non-technological eco-innovations are able to influence technological eco-innovations, both process and product, suggesting that the organizational eco-innovation strategy leads to sustainable technological path dependence in R&D-intensive companies. Additionally, findings demonstrated that the association between organizational and product eco-innovation is stronger whether mediated by process eco-innovation, so the result confirms an evolutionary perspective regarding the differentiated types of eco-innovation. We conclude that by investing in eco-innovative R&D projects, new environmental systems, teams' formation, information flow, and trends monitoring, the company creates a path dependence for technological eco-innovation of process and products.
38
Bichurova, Iva. "CLASSIFICATION OF INNOVATIONS." KNOWLEDGE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL 30, no. 1 (March 20, 2019): 231–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.35120/kij3001231b.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
The predominant part of research and methods of studying innovation focus on technological changes in products or processes. Non-technological or purely organizational and management innovation is relatively less explored, although it is very often closely related to changes in products, services, or processes of their creation. In the late 1990s, studies of technological and non-technological innovation reveal an ever closer intertwining of these types of innovations. The notion of value innovation has begun to be used. In the paper, the classification of innovations is made from different angle and criteria - according to their importance, according to the object of innovation, according to the motivation for their implementation, according to the degree of novelty of the product. from the point of view of consumers and others. The most well-known division of innovations in "pulled" and "pushed" is also presented, as well as the opinion of leading international organizations and committees dealing with innovation. The categories of open innovation, lead-user innovation, distributed innovation, frugal innovation or even "reverse" or " jugaad innovation " and "sustainable and green innovation" are clarified.
39
Radicic, Dragana, and Khurshid Djalilov. "The impact of technological and non-technological innovations on export intensity in SMEs." Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development 26, no. 4 (August 15, 2019): 612–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/jsbed-08-2018-0259.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate how both technological and non-technological innovations influence export intensity in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). In addition, the authors report results for each firm-size category of micro-, small and medium firms, and thus reflect SME heterogeneity. Design/methodology/approach The research methodology is based on the analysis of the Eurobarometer 2014 data set from 28 EU Member States, Switzerland and the USA covering the period 2011–2014. To statistically test the three defined research hypotheses on individual and joint effects of both types of innovation, a multiple treatment model was estimated. The advantage of this empirical strategy is that it takes into account the endogeneity of both technological and non-technological innovations. Moreover, the authors employ the production approach or the direct test of complementarity between technological and non-technological innovations. Findings Empirical findings indicate that technological innovations positively affect export intensity in small and medium firms, whereas non-technological innovations exert no influence on export intensity, regardless of the firm size. Moreover, the results from the direct test suggest no evidence of the complementary effects of technological and non-technological innovation on export intensity. Research limitations/implications The authors infer that SMEs would benefit more from public support targeting both exports and innovations than micro-firms, as the sunk costs of exports are too high for the latter. However, public support aimed at reducing fixed costs of exports could be particularly beneficial for micro-firms. Originality/value The research fills a literature gap on the joint impact of technological and non-technological innovations on export intensity while taking into account the endogeneity of innovation activities and SME heterogeneity.
40
RADICIC, DRAGANA, DAVID DOUGLAS, GEOFF PUGH, and IAN JACKSON. "COOPERATION FOR INNOVATION AND ITS IMPACT ON TECHNOLOGICAL AND NON-TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS: EMPIRICAL EVIDENCE FOR EUROPEAN SMES IN TRADITIONAL MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES." International Journal of Innovation Management 23, no. 05 (May 29, 2019): 1950046. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s1363919619500464.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Drawing on a sample of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in traditional manufacturing industries from seven EU regions, this study investigates how cooperation with external organisations affects technological (product and process) innovations and non-technological (organisational and marketing) innovations as well as the commercial success of product and process innovations (i.e., innovative sales). Our empirical strategy takes into account that all four types of innovation are potentially complementary. Empirical results suggest that cooperation increases firms’ innovativeness and yields substantial commercial benefits. In particular, increasing the number of cooperation partnerships has a positive impact on all measures of innovation performance. We conclude that a portfolio approach to cooperation enhances innovation performance and that innovation support programs should be demand-led.
41
Smulders, Frido, Bertien Broekhans, Aldert Kamp, Hans Hellendoorn, and Hans Welleman. "Educate for Technological Innovation." Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design 1, no. 1 (July 2019): 479–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.52.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
AbstractAt Polytechnics design & engineering students are taught about state-of-the-art technical knowledge. Students become qualified engineers and learn to innovate artifacts related to their domain.Not taught is how to develop new engineering knowledge within a multidisciplinary context of stakeholders, companies and regulations. In short, students don't learn to innovate technology. What is taught today is the result of a technological innovation of yesterday. This is not sufficient for industry to innovatively deal with society's grand challenges.The paper describes a project that aims to educate all TU Delft graduate students in the verb of innovating technology, that is, the development of new technologies from inventions in the labs to full- fledged application in business. Such along three dimensions: technical, human and business.The educational portfolio consists of three modules in line with growth along Bloom's taxonomy and online materials on theoretical backbones. All modules apply the notion of technological innovation journeys (Tijo's). Tijo's are rich descriptions of the developmental journey of new technology and are based on inventions from the university's own labs.
42
Kim, Yoomi. "Technological Innovation, the Kyoto Protocol, and Open Innovation." Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 7, no. 3 (September 8, 2021): 198. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/joitmc7030198.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study investigates the role of technological innovation in increasing the effectiveness of the Kyoto Protocol in terms of greenhouse gas (GHG) mitigation. Panel data showing the number of patents for climate change mitigation technology as a measure of innovation are obtained from 54 countries for the period 1990–2015 to verify whether technological innovation is effective in reducing GHG emissions and whether it has a significant synergetic relationship with the Kyoto Protocol. The historical trends in the number of patents for climate change mitigation technology reveal a relationship between the Kyoto Protocol and technological innovation and show differences between specific types of mitigation technology. Based on these innovation data, this study conducts two-stage least squares analysis that considers the time-lag effect. The empirical results confirm that mitigation innovations for buildings and the production or processing of goods have a strong positive association with GHG emission reduction. The findings also support the long-term synergetic effect between innovation and participation in the Kyoto Protocol in terms of GHG mitigation. This study contributes to international climate change governance by providing empirical evidence for technological innovation’s role in strengthening the effectiveness of international regimes and implications for promoting open innovation.
43
Sharma, Deependra. "Enhancing customer experience using technological innovations." Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes 8, no. 4 (August 8, 2016): 469–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/whatt-04-2016-0018.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Purpose The study aims to provide a comparative analysis of diverse challenges faced by different categories of hotels during the adoption of technological innovation. It also examines the role of technological innovations in enhancing the customer experience from a practitioner’s perspective. Design/methodology/approach Qualitative research is used to better understand the prevailing trends and execution challenges, using the interview method of collecting data. The sample includes owners and senior managers responsible for managing the property. Findings Indian hotels have lagged behind in technology adoption compared with their western counterparts, though the situation is now changing. The paper highlights the positive impact of technological innovation on customer experience and also identifies constraints in adopting technological innovations. Research limitations/implications All hotels participating in this study were selected from a single region of India. Hence, the results may not be a true representation of comparable hotels nationwide. Practical implications Findings of this study enable hotel managers and owners to appreciate the role of technological innovation as a differentiator and to understand a variety of nuances associated with technological innovation. Understanding of these dimensions will enable them to take cautious decisions about allocating resources for technological innovation and also to ensure that their customers are being offered maximum value-for-money. Originality/value The study was conducted in a developing economy where technological innovation is at a relatively early stage. This study explores its objectives from a practitioner’s perspective.
44
González-Blanco, Jennifer, Jose Coca-Pérez, and Manuel Guisado-González. "The Contribution of Technological and Non-Technological Innovation to Environmental Performance. An Analysis with a Complementary Approach." Sustainability 10, no. 11 (November 2, 2018): 4014. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su10114014.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In this study, we pursue two objectives. First, we analyse the influence of product, process, and non-technological innovation on environmental performance. Second, we explore the existence of complementarities or substitutabilities between the different combinations of these three types of innovations to learn which combinations improve or worsen environmental performance. The analyses were performed using data from the 2013 Technological Innovation Panel (PITEC) for Spanish manufacturing companies. We use the two-stage least-squares method as an instrumental variable estimator, which allows us to control the endogeneity and obtain consistent estimators. Our findings indicate that product innovation and process innovation have a negative influence on environmental performance. Likewise, we have also found that the simultaneous implementation of product innovation and process innovation is unconditionally substitutive and that the joint implementation of process innovation and non-technological innovation is conditionally substitutive. This result reinforces the position of those researchers who have pointed out that the association between a greater technology orientation and a better firm environmental performance is probably too simplistic. Finally, it should be emphasized that only non-technological innovation contributes to achieving better environmental performance and that the joint implementation of product innovation and non-technology innovation is conditionally complementary.
45
Smajlović, Selma, Bahrija Umihanić, and Lejla Turulja. "The interplay of technological innovation and business model innovation toward company performance." Management 24, no. 2 (December 18, 2019): 63–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.30924/mjcmi.24.2.5.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
This study aims to clarify the relation between technological innovation and business model innovation and their shared impact on the business success of medium and large enterprises. Drawing on the Resource-Based View, this paper offers a comprehensive research model that analyses the relationships between technological innovation and business model innovations and their impact on business success. Structural Equation Modelling is utilized for the analysis of a dataset collected in a Southeast European developing country among medium and large enterprises. The results show that technological innovation has a positive influence on business model innovation and that business model innovation positively impacts the success of a business. Finally, the results confirm the mediating role of business model innovation between technological innovation and company business success. This research adds to the existing literature by empirically investigating the relationship between technological innovation, business model innovation, and company success identifying an antecedent role in the relationship between technological innovation and business model innovation.
46
Del Carpio Gallegos, Javier Fernando, Francesc Miralles, and Alejandro Erasmo Loli Pineda. "Relationship between market and institutional networks and technological innovation: an analysis of peruvian manufacturing firms." AD-minister, no. 38 (June 30, 2021): 63–92. http://dx.doi.org/10.17230/ad-minister.38.3.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Firms strive to develop technological innovations. This study focuses on two main objectives: to identify the relationship between market and institutional networks and technological innovation; and to analyze the relationship between the obstacles that firms assess when developing innovations. The literature shows that there has been little interest in researching innovation in emerging economies, in which there is a greater presence of low-technology intensity firms that also develop technological innovations. Using data from 705 Peruvian manufacturing firms, a partial structural equation model was applied. The results showed that when firms are linked to networks, their capacity for technological innovation improves.
47
Maier, Lidia. "Types of Innovations in Enterprises of the Republic of Moldova." Intellectus, no. 1 (July 2023): 31–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.56329/1810-7087.23.1.04.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
In the current context, innovation is essential for the survival and maintenance of competitiveness for many enterprises and economies. There are different ways in which an enterprise can innovate. Generally, there are 2 types of innovations – technological and non-technological innovations. Enterprises in their innovation eff orts can choose one of these 2 types or, for increased competitive advantages and additional gains, they can apply multiple types of innovations simultaneously. This study presents a brief analysis of scientific literature in the field, the analysis of the innovation activities of enterprises in the Republic of Moldova with emphasis on the types of innovations adopted. The technological and non-technological dimensions of innovation within enterprises are identified, it is deter-mined which types of innovations are most preferred by enterprises in the country, and a comparison is made of the development of types of innovations compared to previous years/
48
Li, Wenjing, Xue Guo, and Dan Cao. "The Complexity of Technological Innovation Decision-Making in Emerging Industries." Complexity 2021 (July 30, 2021): 1–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/3611921.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
It is well known that innovation-driven emerging industries have gradually become the main driving force of global economic recovery and growth. Technological innovation decision-making is a complex and dynamic system, which is affected by various factors inside and outside an enterprise. In this dynamic system, how to make the optimal technological innovation investment decisions is a key concern for enterprises and governments. As an investment activity, technological innovation largely depends on the amount of external financing obtained by enterprises. However, financial constraints have increasingly become an obstacle to enterprises’ technological innovation. At the same time, technological innovation is also affected by the external political and economic environment, such as changes in economic policy, government subsidy policies, and institutional environmental policies. Can these external environments reduce the negative impact of financing constraints on technological innovation? In this study, based on the data of listed companies in China’s strategic emerging industries, we adopt a panel negative binomial regression model to investigate the complexity of technological innovation decision-making from the perspective of financing constraints. Our main findings include the following. First, financing constraints significantly inhibit the input and output of technological innovation in emerging industries. Second, the inhibition effect on the output of substantive innovations is more pronounced than that on the output of strategic innovations. Third, based on the analysis of enterprise heterogeneity in different dimensions, we show that this inhibition has a selective effect among different industries. Finally, we show that economic policy and marketization can help alleviate the inhibition effect of financing constraints on technological innovation.
49
Bokhari, Syed Asad Abbas, and Myeong Seunghwan. "How Do Institutional and Technological Innovations Influence the Smart City Governance? Focused on Stakeholder Satisfaction and Crime Rate." Sustainability 16, no. 10 (May 17, 2024): 4246. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su16104246.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Effective institutional and technological development are key to governance in smart cities. This study investigates the fundamental complexities of institutional and technological innovations in smart cities. A city’s innovation capabilities depend significantly on its technology and implementation capacity. This study suggests that institutional and technological innovation serve a role that moderates the relationships between smart city governance, stakeholder satisfaction, and crime rate. Multiple regression models were developed by surveying 496 Pakistani citizens with a questionnaire. Using stakeholders and innovation theories, analyzing the relationships between smart governance, stakeholder satisfaction, and city crime rates reveals a moderating role of institutional and technological innovation. The findings showed that institutional and technological innovations have strengthened the stakeholder satisfaction level while weakening the crime rate in a smart city.
50
MAHDAVIMAZDEH, HOSSEIN, LOREN FALKENBERG, and MADELYNN STACKHOUSE. "THE INNOVATION VALUE CANVAS: A GUIDE TO DEFINING VALUE PROPOSITIONS AND TARGET CUSTOMERS FOR COMMERCIALIZATION OF TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATIONS." International Journal of Innovation Management 24, no. 02 (February 1, 2019): 2050012. http://dx.doi.org/10.1142/s1363919620500127.
Повний текст джерелаАнотація:
Many innovations result from firms following theories and models of innovation such as disruptive innovation, blue ocean innovation, etc. Yet, there are many other innovations that are not developed through these models and rather stem from technological pushes and research and development efforts. The commercial success of these innovations is contingent upon existence of a good fit between the technological innovation and the accompanying business model. To date, this fit has been mostly sought through trials and errors. In this paper, we develop a framework for analytically choosing and aligning two important components of the business model — value proposition and target market — to fit the technological innovations. We illustrate the framework using case examples of products in the market.