International Journal of Innovation Science

2010 International Journal of Innovation Science

doi: 10.1260/1757-2223.2.3.i

Dubey, Rameshwar; Ghai, Sachin

2010 International Journal of Innovation Science

doi: 10.1260/1757-2223.2.3.97

In this study the relationship between the role of innovative intermediaries in a conversion leadership style and innovative behavior of managers and staff is investigated. Research findings confirm the relations between innovative intermediaries and intellectual arousal, motivation inspiration, thoughtful individual with innovative behavior (01 / 0> p), but the relations between the role of innovative intermediaries and creative ideas and the influence of systematic problem solving style on innovative behavior (01 / 0> p) was not confirmed.

Smith, MA; Starkey, AP

2010 International Journal of Innovation Science

doi: 10.1260/1757-2223.2.3.103

This paper considers key factors which have an impact on the development and implementation of innovations in the public sector and explores how beneficial elements of private sector governance can be utilised and incorporated into approaches to support innovation in the public sector. It discusses a number of concepts which could be important for innovation in the public sector; these include overt and covert innovation, primary and secondary innovation and organisational equilibrium. The relationship between risk and trust is considered and the importance of accountability is addressed. The utilisation of special purpose vehicles is discussed, highlighting how private sector governance can be utilised to support innovation in the public sector. The value of this approach is supported by an example which has been in operation for seven years; the special purpose vehicle operates using private sector governance but is essentially owned by a group of large public sector organisations.

Harrington, Jim; Voehl, Frank

2010 International Journal of Innovation Science

doi: 10.1260/1757-2223.2.3.113

The age of innovation is here. In most business organizations, creativity is a means to an end, which is innovation. Creativity is the process of generating something new that has value to an organization, group or individual. Innovation is the process of generating a new mindset to produce something that has significant value to an organization or an individual or to society in general. The operative word that distinguishes innovations from creativity is significant. Innovation is the successful implementation of a new concept or product. Innovation is the sustainable process that provides a significant competitive advantage. Research has turned innovation from a haphazard, random occurrence into an understood process that anyone can benefit from. This paper reveals how this new exciting problem-solving and product/process development methodology has become the cornerstone of our Innovative Problem Solving model and the promise of exciting new things to come.

Andersson, E. Roland; Lundblad, Jan; Jansson, Bjarne

2010 International Journal of Innovation Science

doi: 10.1260/1757-2223.2.3.123

The rationale behind our approach was that product innovations in occupational health and safety originate from radical innovation processes where ideas are tested naturally before any rational decisions are made. Our thesis therefore was that an open and subsidized radical innovation arena might counteract today's development imperfections and also be profitable to the society as a whole. In this study we critically scrutinized the implementation of such a publically open arena in the Swedish construction industry, which is an area with large costs for accidents and injuries. We used a two-step action research approach in order to compare the efficiency of a general arena (Innovation Stockholm) with a specialised health and safety arena, given the same radical supporting style and entrepreneurial culture. Our results confirmed our thesis: both arenas produced successful innovations and were profitable to the society as a whole. The specialised arena even doubled the efficiency for an idea to be in the market after 2 years: from 0.1 ideas to 0.25 ideas. In a general perspective we believe that our findings can contribute to the discussion on the “Open innovation” concept and how to reorganize the established “Science Park” innovation model.

2010 International Journal of Innovation Science

doi: 10.1260/1757-2223.2.3.141