MOST RESEARCH INTO INNOVATION SYSTEMS DRAWS ON EVOLUTIONARY AND COMPLEXITY THEORIES, WHERE ECONOMIC GROWTH AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE ARE SEEN AS INDIGENOUS TO THE SYSTEM. THE EMPHASIS IS MAINLY ON THE DYNAMICS, PROCESS AND TRANSFORMATION OF KNOWLEDGE AND LEARNING INTO DESIRED OUTPUTS WITHIN AN ADAPTIVE AND COMPLEX ECONOMIC SYSTEM
technology can be used to reduce operating costs, shorten cycle times or how local investments can be unlocked or leveraged. Most economic development programmes that are not focused on individuals are locked in at the firm level, and they do not translate their insights at the firm level to the industry. Moving from one firm to many firms is not necessarily systemic or holistic.
Thirdly, an underlying assumption in
many Technology Transfer or economic development programmes with an emphasis on technology is that the problem is that firms cannot innovate (for whatever reason), therefore agencies must innovate on their behalf. It therefore takes a very narrow perspective that innovation is about products or processes that are commercialised, and that technology is about hardware and training. It completely misses the point that innovations emerge from within a specific framework, and that giving a firm a new product on a platter is not technology transfer nor is it sustainable. Furthermore, much of the literature of the importance of competent management, technology management and the role of rivalry or competition in stimulating innovation is ignored. Innovation as a goal in itself becomes the main priority.
Related to this narrow view on innovation is the assumption that innovation is an engineering or research problem. It completely ignores the fact that an innovation system is a dynamic system that is mainly about how different economic agents interact, engage, share information, learn together, and remember (learn) what works and what does not work.
In the fourth place, there are clearly visible obstacles at the local or sectoral level that can only be addressed by cooperation of different public and private stakeholders in an ongoing process of learning what is possible. Whether it is about a lack of information of a certain kind (like who are all these tourists
34 Management Today | September 2012 The Innovation Journal
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111