Advertisement

The Concept of Dichotomy of the Innovation Process in an Enterprise

  • Leszek KoziolEmail author
  • Michal Koziol
Conference paper
Part of the Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics book series (SPBE)

Abstract

The article presents selected, more important definitions of innovation in an enterprise, paying attention to those of them which emphasize its immaterial character. It describes models of the innovation process, concepts of the innovativeness system and models of the innovative activity of a firm. It was found out that the elements of these objects are a coherent entirety. The principle of the presented research approach is the paradigm assigned to Schumpeter of merging various activities within the innovation process. It turned out, however, that an attempt to implement such a broad programme, namely the invention and the imitation of innovation, often ends in failure. The reason is that we cannot recognize the tools of analysis and define the determinants of the innovation process in the comprehensive Schumpeterian approach, however, we can resolve these issues by studying each fragment of this processes of innovative character. The aim of the article is to present the concept of the dichotomy of the innovation process in an enterprise and indicate the way of using it in practice. Two autonomous processes, crucial for the development of innovativeness, are distinguished in this concept, namely the process of innovation invention in its immaterial form and the process of innovation implementation which has got material and immaterial character. In the strategy of an organization it is necessary to define the object and the scope of analysis, at the same time considering the level of innovation ability of an enterprise; in a creative industry they may specialize in creating ideas, designing novelties and offering innovative projects to an appropriately selected target group. Traditional firms should develop and implement these projects in practice to the benefit of customers. It should be emphasized that the choice of the subject of innovative activity determines the innovation ability of the organization, the ability to manage innovative projects and the use of modern (agile) management methods, as well as management pragmatics. The article is of theoretical and empirical character. To achieve the aim and verify the theses, following research methods were used: literature analysis, impact factor analysis, professional conversations with experts.

Keywords

Innovation Models of the innovation process Innovative project management Concept of the dichotomy of the innovation process 

JEL Classification

O 032 

References

  1. Amabile, T. (1983). The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer. ISBN 3540908307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bartol, K. M., & Martin, D. C. (1991). Management. New York: McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0070039267.Google Scholar
  3. Bonney, L. B. (2012). Insights into ‘mysterious processes’: Incentivising co-innovation in agrifood value chains (Ph.D. thesis). University of Tasmania.Google Scholar
  4. Drucker, P. F (1992). Innowacja i przedsiębiorczość. Praktyka i zasady (A. Ehrlich, Trans.). Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne. ISBN 8320808707.Google Scholar
  5. Duncan, W. R. (1995). A guide to the project management body of knowledge. Upper Darby: Project Management Institute. ISBN 1880410133.Google Scholar
  6. Griffin, R. (2004). Podstawy zarządzania organizacjami (M. Rusiński, Trans.). Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN. ISBN 8301140186.Google Scholar
  7. Gruber, M., Kim, S. M., & Brinckmann, J. (2015). What is an attractive business opportunity? An empirical study of opportunity evaluation decisions by technologists, managers, and entrepreneurs. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 9(3), 205–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Holmes, M., Holcomb, T. R., Klein, P. G., & Ireland, R. D. (2013). The role of judgment and decisions in new-venture formation: Toward a behavioral model. In Paper presented at the Strategic Management Society Conference. Atlanta.Google Scholar
  9. Hogan, S. J., Soutar, G. N., McColl-Kennedy, J. R., & Sweeney, J. C. (2011). Reconceptualizing professional service firm innovation capability. Scale Development. Industrial Marketing Management, 40(8), 1264–1273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Howells, J. (2005). The management of technological innovation: The shaping of technology and institutions of the market economy. London: Sage. ISBN 9781446229842.Google Scholar
  11. Kelley, T., & Littman, J. (2009). Sztukainnowacji (G. Łuczkiewicz, Trans.). Warszawa: MT Biznes. ISBN 9788361040859.Google Scholar
  12. Kozioł, L., & Ćwiertniak, R. (2018). Kształtowanie portfela projektów w zarządzaniu innowacjami. In P. Cabała (ed.). Zarządzanie portfelem projektów w organizacji. Koncepcje i kierunki badań (pp. 183–203). Kraków: Mfiles.pl. ISBN 9788394140847.Google Scholar
  13. Kozioł, L., Wojtowicz, A., & Karaś, A. (2017). The concept of the innovative tourism enterprises evaluation capability. In V. Katsoni, A. Upadhya, & A. Stratigea (Eds.). Tourism culture and heritage in a smart economy (pp. 159–172). Springer Proceedings in Business and Economics. Cham: Springer. ISBN 9783319477312.Google Scholar
  14. Kuznets, S. (1959). Six lectures on economic growth. Glencoe: Free Press of Glencoe.Google Scholar
  15. Lucas, R. E., Jr. (1988). On the mechanism of economics development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1), 3–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mankins, J. C. (1995). Technology readiness levels. A White Paper. Washington: NASA. Advance Concepts Office, Office of Space Access and Technology.Google Scholar
  17. McGowan, P. (1997). Innowacja i przedsiębiorczość wewnętrzna. In D. M. Steward (Ed.). Praktyka kierowania (pp. 579–600). (A. Ehrlich, Trans.). Warszawa: Polskie Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne. ISBN 8320810256.Google Scholar
  18. Oslo, Podręcznik. (2008). Zasady gromadzenia i interpretacji danych dotyczących innowacji. Warszawa: European Commission, OECD, Ministry of Science and Higher Education. ISBN 9788361100133.Google Scholar
  19. Porter, M. E. (1990). The Competitive Advantage of Nations. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0029253616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovation. New York: Free Press. ISBN 0743222091.Google Scholar
  21. Schumpeter, J. A. (1939). Business cycles. A theoretical, historical and statistical analysis of the capitalist process. New York: McGrow-Hill Book Company.Google Scholar
  22. Skillicorn, N. (2016). What is innovation? 15 experts share their innovation definition. In Idea to value. Retrieved November 15, 2017 from https://www.ideatovalue.com/inno/nickskillicorn/2016/03/innovation-15-experts-share-innovation-definition/.
  23. Tidd, J., & Bessant, J. (2013). Zarządzanie innowacjami. Integracja zmian technologicznych, rynkowych i organizacyjnych (J. Szostak, Trans.). Warszawa: Oficyna a Wolters Kluwer business. ISBN 9788326431500.Google Scholar
  24. Tödtling, F., Lehner, P., & Kaufman, A. (2009). Do different types of innovation rely on specific kinds of knowledge interactions? Technovation, 29(1), 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Trías de Bes, F., & Kotler, P. (2013). Innowacyjność przepis na sukces. Model „od A do F” (M. Zawiślak, J. Środa, Trans.). Poznań: Wydawnictwo Rebis. ISBN 9788375108132.Google Scholar
  26. Whitfield, P. (1979). Innowacje w przemyśle (T. Mroczkowski, Trans.). Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Ekonomiczne.Google Scholar
  27. Wysocki, R. (2013). Efektywne zarządzanie projektami: tradycyjne, zwinne, ekstremalne. Gliwice: Helion. ISBN 9788324639069.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Management and TourismMalopolska School of EconomicsTarnowPoland

Personalised recommendations