Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
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.
International Journal of Innovation Science – Emerald Publishing
Published: Sep 1, 2010
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.