Principally, organizations grow own competitive advantages and profitability by being innovative. Innovation processes are usually successful when they are typified by the involvement of stakeholders in as numerous organizational and commercial functions as possible (Mumford, Hunter & Bedell-Avers, 2008). Such functions include distribution, manufacturing, marketing, and sales. When the processes are underway, organizations require staff bases with varied competences relating to the development, testing, as well as commercialization, of specific new products (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). To ensure success in the designing of particular innovation approaches, or strategies, organizations ought to appraise the relevant external, as well as internal, factors and appreciate the relationships among them and general innovation. Many organizations innovate just some of own organizational designs, processes, or products.
Factors Impacting on the Designing of Innovation Strategies
There are diverse external, as well as internal, factors that affect how innovation strategies are designed. The internal ones include leadership and culture. The principal external factor is the economies in which organizations operate. Innovative leaderships largely determine organizations’ success otherwise. Innovative strategies are effectively designed when leaders partake actively in the designing by guiding and inspiring their innovation teams (Mumford, Hunter & Bedell-Avers, 2008). They are effectively designed when leaders actively persuade and model behaviors that are innovative. Ideally, to support innovation, leaders should characterize the form of innovation with the capacity to drive grow and assist in meeting specific strategic goals (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). Ideally, to support innovation, leaders should have innovation accommodated in the official agenda of given regular meetings. That serves to demonstrate the value that the leaders attach to value management. Besides, ideally, to support innovation, leaders should set high innovation performance targets and metrics, including financial metrics and behavioral metrics.
Read also Company With Best Innovation – Amazon
Organizational cultures affect how innovation strategies are designed. The strategies are mainly effective when they are the products of inspiring and ambitious cultures and related engagements. Inspiring organizational cultures rule out lone-minded incremental business add-ons. When a culture is ambitious, designers easily design strategies that help them fight competition. Notably, numerous innovation strategies are mainly incremental. Organizations that are defined by an established relentless growth culture are capable of attaining own goals. The relentless growth spirit ensures a continual flow of ideas and constant reinvigoration of the organizations (Mumford, Hunter & Bedell-Avers, 2008). Consequently, the elementary challenge confronting organizations’ leaders who are keen on designing innovations is to grow environments that are characterized by constant and safe reassessment of the related directions and decisions.
Organizations have an easy time in designing innovations when their cultures are defined by stakeholder motivation. Every stakeholder expresses less potential than she or he has really. Motivating and inspirational leaders take up the responsibility of maximizing the potential and the related results and performance. The leaders wield marked influence on the stakeholder by motivating him or her (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). They convince the stakeholder that failing is accepted and errors are critical to organizational growth as well as innovation provided that the instituted systems are designed to ensure the correction of the errors when they happen.
As noted earlier, the principal external factor is the economies in which organizations operate. The economies in which organizations operate affect their overall success (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). Mostly, organizations are incapable of controlling economic dynamics that impact on their success. Ideally, organizations put in place innovation strategies that are adaptive and capable of evolving to match such dynamics. For instance, to accommodate specific economic changes, many businesses develop incorporate learning as their innovation strategy (Mumford, Hunter & Bedell-Avers, 2008). Incorporate learning allows organizations to make adjustments to the preferred economic courses to lessen losses accordingly, especially during economic recessions (Ferragina, 2013; Amendola, Ferragina, Pittiglio & Reganati, 2012).
According to Ferragina (2013) and Amendola, Ferragina, Pittiglio and Reganati (2012), several research studies have demonstrated that there exists a positive, as well as robust, relationship between macroeconomic level innovation along with organizational growth on one hand and the corresponding microeconomic level organizational economic innovation and performance. Even then, economists have limited opportunities for studying such relationships when grave economic downturns are underway. Difficult economic times compel organizations to institute survival innovation strategies. They intervene on process and product areas via innovative measures (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). Research demonstrates that there is considerable relation between organizational capacities to address the difficulties brought about by economic crises and their past innovative interventions along organization, process, and product facets, or dimensions (Amendola, Ferragina, Pittiglio & Reganati, 2012).
Factors Considered in Innovation Systems Design
The designing of innovation systems involves varied factors. First, the designing of innovation systems involves a research and design (RD) factor. RD takes on varied models for designing the systems: linear model and chain-link model. The designing processes and related research based on the linear model are taken as the commencement points of innovation processes (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). Even then, in the designing processes and related research based on the chain-link model, RD is taken as a tool for solving specific problems. The tool is employed at varied stages accordingly. The model, consequently, characterizes RD to be applied by numerous divergent stakeholders in different areas. Overall, RD is never an innovation precondition. Rather, it is adjunct to it.
Second, the designing of innovation systems involves a leadership factor. Leadership is one of the concepts that leaders ought to consider when keen on fostering innovation in their organizations (Mumford, Hunter & Bedell-Avers, 2008). As noted earlier, innovative leaderships largely determine organizations’ success otherwise. Innovative strategies are effectively designed when leaders partake actively in the designing by guiding and inspiring their innovation teams. They are effectively designed when leaders actively persuade and model behaviors that are innovative (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). Ideally, to support innovation, leaders should characterize the form of innovation with the capacity to drive grow and assist in meeting specific strategic goals. Ideally, to support innovation, leaders should have innovation accommodated in the official agenda of given regular meetings. That serves to demonstrate the value that the leaders attach to value management (Mumford, Hunter & Bedell-Avers, 2008). Besides, ideally, to support innovation, leaders should set high innovation performance targets and metrics, including financial metrics and behavioral metrics.
Why Innovation Systems are Important
Innovation systems are important in varied ways. First, the systems helping in shifting policy focus from specific organizations to larger sets of organizations and the interactions between the organizations. Second, the systems provide approaches that are useful in shifting focus from particular technological and scientific inputs, including RD activities, to specific innovation processes and related outcomes (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). Third, the systems provide approaches that are useful in shifting focus on policy from decisions on whether or not to prop the demand or supply of technology and science to matters that impact on knowledge’s supply as well as demand. Besides, the systems help in emphasizing policy analyses and interventions to prop innovation at varied economic levels.
Innovation Planning Process Steps
The innovation planning process entails a number of successive steps (Lehman, Simpson, Knight & Flynn, 2011). The first step entails the generation, or production, of new thinking or ideas. The step entails brainstorming and exploring other industries for ideas that can be adopted accordingly to fit the present needs. In the second step, the ideas are appraised so as to determine the best among them (Daim, Pizarro & Talla, 2014; Morris, 2011). Marketplaces are examined to determine the working of comparable ideas and the extant market gaps with unmet needs. The third step involves the development of new products to meet the identified needs in the marketplaces (Caetano & Amaral, 2013). The last step is defined by the production, as well as distribution, of the products in their ultimate forms.
Conclusion
Primarily, organizations grow own competitive advantages and profitability by being innovative. There are diverse external, as well as internal, factors that affect how innovation strategies are designed. The internal ones include leadership and culture. The principal external factor is the economies in which organizations operate. The designing of innovation systems involves varied factors: the RD factor and the leadership factor. Innovation systems are important in varied ways, including helping in shifting policy focus from specific organizations to larger sets of organizations and the interactions between the organizations.
Get Your Custom Paper From Professional Writers. 100% Plagiarism Free, No AI Generated Content and Good Grade Guarantee. We Have Experts In All Subjects.
Place Your Order Now