Keep in mind that all of the free essays on our site are only the exampes, do not use them as your own.
Innovations under conditions of uncertainty- Normative model of innovation
Introduction
Innovation is one of the most important aspects in most of the business organizations as they strive to attain their goals and objectives. It brings about changes in the traditional way of management to new and improved methods. All these methods will try to answer questions that are usually presented to managers regarding the value of the products and services offered these organizations (Davis& Scott, 2007). The need for to coming up with characteristics that can stimulate innovations is paramount to organization’s success. Furthermore there is need to provide a conducive environment where such innovators can thrive in. There is also the need for managers to come up with ways or effective methods that they use to differentiate priorities in terms of resource allocation (Gjerding, 2003). This paper will highlight and draw comparisons on different models and theories of innovation. The paper will also discuss the effects of different approaches to innovation process. Furthermore, the paper will also define concepts pertinent to innovation and use the concepts to illuminate on the effects of unintended consequences on the innovation process.
Discussion
As an important point of consideration, Innovation should not be taken as a mechanical procedure that can be achieved in unplanned way. It is more of an accurate systematic approach achieved through a highly crafted adaptive system. It involves resilience, hard work and dedication. Naturally, innovation in any business is achieved as a result of interplay of three successful forces. These forces are selection, variation, and replication. The managers should be aware that when Organizing for the process of innovation. A great deal of excellent awareness regarding these three forces and their individual working is required (Galunic and Eisenhardt, 2001).
Majority of the business organizations identify their need for innovation that advises them differently. Some businesses may agree on theories that make the organization to take great risks while on the other hand accept failure. Others may follow theories that create an interesting work environment. There are also theories that encourage business networking between different organizations. This allows flexibility. The reality behind coming up with these theories cum ideas is usually the need to shift from the outdated ways of conducting business. Without proper innovations, business organizations may end up making huge losses and also loss of employees to other organizations that stand the wave of innovation (Watson & Harris, 1999).
Organizations may have unique strengths and weaknesses, with regard to planning for innovation. This calls for coming up with effective ways of resource mobilization in order to support the process of innovation. After these systems are put into place, there is need to appreciating those behind the ideas and also nurturing the idea. This will ensure the survival of the idea and also the organization is assured of continued support from those behind the idea. To organizations that are dispersed in many regions or networked organizations, their ideas spread faster to consumers than their counterparts (Garvin, 1993). Innovation is defined as the use of new ideas to the products and processes, or any o other activities that may increase value to an organization. This value is usually aimed at benefiting the organization as well as its consumers. However, innovation involves two aspects; product innovation and process innovation. Product innovation generally refers to the introduction of new products or a substantial change in the already existing products. On the other hand process innovation usually refers to coming up with a new ways in processing goods and services
Product innovations involve tangible processed goods and intangible services. It can also be a both products. Mobile phones and computers provide a good example of more recent tangible goods that have impacted heavily on the lives of people both at the working places and also at home. The combination of both the tangible and Intangible products have cannot be undermined. For example intangible products are used alongside the tangible products like computer softwares and the computers themselves. The softwares are needed for the proper working of the computer. They also help in transmission of information from one person to another (Garvin, 1993).
Synchronizing the three roles of Innovation
In all successive organizations, innovation is not taken as a solitary activity but rather handled as a detailed process. This is usually assigned to particular employees who have shown commitment to innovation. These organizations view it as the end product brought about by an effective network composed of a team of individuals who clearly understand their responsibilities. There is usually support from one another during the entire process. The organization must also chip in by supporting their ideas and also recognizing their efforts. The idea should also be nurtured from its infancy. The key individual roles in the organization are the innovator, the agent of change and the gatekeeper. With the interplay of these three roles, the success of the idea is guaranteed as a result of team work (Garvin, 1993).
Role the innovators
These are the original owners of the idea that the organization is willing to undertake .they dream big and usually convert their dreams into actions. From them the ideas are said to natural or rather unexplored. These ideas may be big or small. When these ideas are brought into the right they receive a lot of scrutiny of which most is criticism. if these ideas come to happen when an organization is facing crisis especially from the competitors, they may be accepted to bring the crisis to an end. In this regard the organization is forced to take risk in order to save itself from the crisis. It takes wise decision to give into such ideas, however if the idea saves the organization then the innovator carries the day.
All these ideas brought up are for the success of the organization thus they are usually granted audience before they are thrown out. Most of these ideas however due to criticism are not granted audience and they don’t survive to see the light of the day due to negative criticism. Other innovators are not bold enough to present such ideas to the light as a result of poor or unconducive working environments in their organizations.
As a point of consideration, it should be made clear that innovators cannot come up with new ideas whenever the organization is faced with crisis. Majority of the innovations come about by mere accident rather than from point of consciousness or from deliberate responsibility (Garvin, 1993). However this is not the case in all innovations as some may arise when the organization is in dire need of them. Innovations also require good management systems from a good understanding of the key roles and functions of every part in the system. The organizations need to provide an environment where new ideas can be born and nurtured. In this environment they have a comfortable way of transferring their ideas to the gate keepers. From the networks created by the gatekeepers the innovators are made key players in the game. Innovators need to be independent and should also avoid office politics as this can influence negatively on their ideas (Butler, 1988).
The Gate Keepers
These are the transformers of the real idea into action. The gate keepers are usually the top managers or the employees who are usually networked both inside and outside the organization. These are the people who provide infrastructure and resources for the new idea for it to proper. This is because of the variations that are usually involved in the process of nurturing the idea. In the process of generating and nurturing the ideas, a lot of challenges are usually encountered and it is the role of the gate keepers to provide solutions to the challenges. They need to listen to all ideas presented by the innovators and chose the best of the ideas that can propel the organization to the desired direction.
The innovators need to be informed by the gate keepers that it is only the best ideas that may be put into consideration (Butler, 1988). Gate keeping of the ideas is important in all organizations as it usually assures the innovator that their ideas are going to be nurtured and will help the organization achieve its goals and objectives. Furthermore all ideas must usually pas through this process and also it is under this process that damaging variations are eliminated.
Change Agents
In all organizations there is always a wide range of people from different cultures, religions and race. All these people have different personalities and relate differently with others. An innovator may come up with a very good idea that can change the organizations but due to strained relationships among colleagues, this idea may fail to come to be. The change agents are the people who remove such barriers in the organization and actively promote new ideas. Without the change agents, good ideas from innovators may not be considered. Through the role of change agents, innovations usually spread more rapidly and establish a competitive position in the business world. This involves changing the employees’ attitudes and perceptions in order to support the new idea. Through this entire process of replication, tremendous results are witnessed on the side of the organization (Mclean, 2005). Change agents help spur innovation in an organization. However, they also open up ways for the development of many products whose effect on the society many not be entirely quantified. For instance, the development of products that might have a negative effect on its users, whether unforeseen or otherwise may result from the efforts of change agents.
Obligatory Points of Passage
Certain processes have to be followed in the innovative process. Like in the obligatory points of passage, these processes converge at the outcome of the innovative processes. However, other outcomes that were unintended might prevail. For instance, the development of certain products using a specified process might lead to the production of toxic wastes that harm the environment. Although this was highly unintended, it is a consequence of the process of innovation. The unintended consequences need not be of a negative nature. Positive unintended consequences may also arise from the process of innovation. A good example is the processing of pork. The byproducts of the processing procedure do not all go to waste. Some of them are further processed into other products that may not have been initially intended when the process was developed.
Nurturing Innovations
Prosperous innovations often involve variation, replication and selection. In this regard, these forces can only operate in distinct organizational settings. There has been no definite answer that can be used to put into check the interplay these forces. However a little thing can be learnt from some emerging trends in the current economy. The organization only needs to know the kind of trend that fit in its shoes. The final step for the organization is to create an environment that supports the trend (Yukl, 2006).
Product and process development
In many organizations especially those that are involved in industrial processes, innovations of the product assortment coupled with innovations of the new processes that generate the products is very important.in many of the available information, the key areas of focus are usually on the product itself and the procedures involved leaving contact between the product and the process (Mclean, 2005). The product-process theory offers a valuable model by helping in the understanding the process of industrial innovation in this model the ideal relationships covering the life cycle of the product in all stages of development.
Through the virtue of identifying and splitting the process and product innovations, different stages of innovation can be used. These stages are the segmental, the systemic and uncoordinated. The current stage of product life cycle mainly determines the process innovation. The life cycle of the any given product together with its manufacturing process can be referred to the product process theory. This can result in the growth of the whole process of manufacturing the products. The theory has been shown to help a wide range of manufacturing companies (Hayes &Wheelwright, 1979). In the initial stage of innovation process is usually the uncoordinated stage. It is normally characterized by changes in the design of the product and productivity of the processes that will be involved.
At this level, performance of the product is entirely dependent on the design of the product. As a result of the slow and mostly unorganized processes in terms of technology and other organization hitches, the general improvements are low. Generally at this stage there are a numerous constraints hindering the progress of the product development thus failing to perform well. This may also result in increased costs of production as result of failure to have standardized processes (Ettlie, 1995). After the product has been fully designed, it enters the segmental stage. This is after an agreed designed of the product has been accepted. In this stage there is more coordination of the processes compared to the earlier stage.
More resources will also be employed in this stage. The organization will start to source for more equipment’s to handle the new design of the product. As a result of proper condition use of more specialized equipment, the production volumes are expected to increase. The production costs are expected to reduce due to reduction in the modification of the product. Eventually the sales volume of the product will increase (Hayes &Wheelwright, 1979).
The last stage is usually the systemic stage. This involves high technological solutions which are complex and sophisticated. The organization has made all the possible changes in the entire process resulting in a more refined final product. At this point the organization aims at cutting or rather minimizing all costs that are involved in the process. It is at this stage that a tight linkage between the process and the final product is witnessed. The product and the process are interdependent at this stage. After the final touches on the standardization, further processes of innovation of both the product and process need to be stopped or decreased (Hayes &Wheelwright, 1979).
As the three stages, competitive strategies need to be adopted. These will be maximization of performance, sales and minimization of sales. This model generally provides possible explanations regarding the industrial process. As a matter of consideration, the basic ideas of the this approach into a more dynamic system taking into consideration into the technology of computer aided design in manufacturing process can greatly improve the innovation process. This allows changes in different levels of innovation. This allows monitoring of all the processes particularly if there are hitches in the process, this allows direct monitoring. This also allows product variation of high quality at later stages (Freel, 2000).
Other models have also been suggested like the two dimensional model by Hayes and wheel. This is a matrix involving product- process linking the life cycle of the process and stage of the product during its life cycle. This matrix allows the interaction of both the process and product during the lifecycle. In the rows of the matrix there is the process lifecycle while in the columns there is the product life. With kind of matrix it is possible to describe the organization’s options especially with regard to its industrial function. This greatly also helps in timing of taking innovative decisions. It also shows the organization’s processing capabilities (Schein, 1992).
The idea of Hayes and Wheelwright has further been improved by Porter to give the product line complexity and process structure complexity. It incorporates performance, strategy and the use of technology in manufacturing. It allows the business to enjoy manufacturing competitiveness. This model gives high quality processing structure in processing thus lowering the complexity to product line. In this strategy the manufacturing cost is reduced as a result of very high level of mechanization (Love and roper, 2004). In the combination of these models, there is evidence of interconnection between process, product and the strategy employed in most of the manufacturing companies. All these have been employed in industrial innovation. They offer information on proper timing, decision making and level of innovation with regard to the maturity of the product life cycle. This also allows the organizations to formulate sound manufacturing strategies that may help cut cost on production or investing in a new product. It also helps the organizations to develop competitive strategies that will enable their products compete fairly in the market.
Innovations Under Uncertainty
In most of the environments where majority of the business operate, there are unseen factors that make the process of innovation to become a very difficult task. Some may assume that these factors might as well affect their competitors but they are usually wrong as most of the competitors have learnt to adapt quickly in these changing circumstances. These circumstances may be forces ranging from economic and politics. Others may issues on licensing and technology. With all these taken into consideration the organization need to either find ways of improving the existing infrastructure or keep up with the rising demand of their goods or services.
In organizations where it is difficult to obtain licenses in order to expand its services, it may seek to partner with other organizations. This will follow after signing of agreements that will indicate the scope of conducting the business. The organization can also change its services in areas that are not regulated. Furthermore the organization can come up with services that will help it camouflage its self in the market (Bijker & Law, 1997). With regard to survival most of the medium sized companies are faced by the problem of infrastructure. Lack of infrastructure is one of the great hindrances to innovation as it places them at the point of elimination by the well established companies. These are very economic and technical conditions on the part of these organizations. Because of the limited economies of scale and unfair regulatory interventions, these organizations have no capacity to influence any kind of negotiations. In this regard their existence and business survival together with their good ideas of innovation are put at stake.
Barriers Associated with Innovation
Majority of the managers are familiarizing with the creativity concepts in an effort to safeguard their business objectives. This usual brings out the need for change in order to remain relevant in the competitive business world. Coming up with innovations that can safeguard their business is an important aspect in most of the business endeavors. Certain ways need to be changed from the traditional way of conducting business.
Conclusion
The majority of the barriers hindering innovation may be entirely with the organization. Certain organizations may face the challenge of infrastructure, negative attitudes and perceptions from the employees. All these kind of barriers must be known to the gate keepers innovators and change agents. Size of the organization may form an advantage to the innovations however when it comes to the process of innovation it becomes a hindrance. The culture to support innovations is usually absent in many organizations. Managers must identify this culture and find a way of removing it from their organization as it can lead to their failure. This problem can be eradicated by ensuring that people work as a team and sustaining a large innovation network.
References
Bijker, W. E., & Law, J. (1997). Shaping technology/building society: studies in sociotechnical change. Cambridge, Mass. [u.a.], MIT Press.
Butler, J.E. (1988). Theories of Technological Innovation as Useful Tools for Corporate, strategy, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 9, 15-29.
Davis, G.F. & W.R. Scott (2007), Organizations and Organizing. Rational, Natural and Open System Perspectives, Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Pearson.
Ettlie, J.E., (1995). Product-Process Development Integration in Manufacturing, Management Science, Vol. 41, No. 7, 1224–1237.
Freel, M. S. (2000). Strategy and structure in innovative manufacturing SMEs: The case of an English region. Small Business Economics, 15(1), 27–45.
Garvin, D. A. (1993): Building a Learning Organization, Harvard Business Review, July-August, pp78-92.
Gjerding, A.N. (2003), “The flexible firm: new concepts and differences between the Nordic systems of innovation”, pp.122-143.
Hayes, R.H., Wheelwright, S.C. (1979). Link Manufacturing Process and Product Life Cycles, Harvard Business Review, Jan.-Feb. 1979, 133–140.
Love, J. & Roper, S. (2004). The organization of innovation: collaboration, cooperation and multifunctional groups in UK and German manufacturing. Cambridge Journal of Economy, 28, 3, 379-395.
McLean, L. (2005). Organizational culture’s influence on creativity and innovation: A review of the literature and implications for human resources development. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 7, 2, 226-246.
Schein, E. (1992), Organizational Culture and Leadership, 2nd ed., San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Galunic, D.C. and Eisenhardt, K.M. (2001). 'Architectural Innovation and Modular Corporate Forms'. Academy of Management Journal, 44/6: 1229-1249.
Watson, T., & Harris, P. (1999). The emergent manager. London. Sage.
Yukl, G. (2006), Leadership in Organizations, 6th ed., Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice-Hall.
