Synopsis:
Innovation: Innovation chain:
ART13.pdf
if ways are found for closing gaps in the innovation chain. 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Innovation chain; Emerging irreversibilities; Strategy support system; Constructive technology assessmentavailable online at www. sciencedirect. com Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 517 538 Corresponding author.
10.1016/j. techfore. 2008.02.002 1. Lacunae and prospects of assessment and alignment tools for emerging science and technology For innovation to succeed actor alignment in the form of innovation chains from laboratory to products
and sustaining an innovation chain. These aims pose tremendous managerial challenges: Noes have to combine‘vertical'or bottom-up management of a portfolio of research projects with‘horizontal'stimulation of science-to-industry innovation chains.
This includes actors outside the network, in the case of nanotechnology, start-ups and SMES which have a lot at stake in entering such risky innovation chains.
Many networks and platforms have dedicated working groups or programmes on foresight, strategic planning and anticipation of societal and ethical hurdles to innovation based on emerging technologies.
T. Propp/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 517 538 of alignment to allow for the creation of innovation chains in the field of micro and nanotechnology.
Specifically, we focus on the stimulation of innovation chains in the field of cell-on-a-chip devices. 9 This field is perceived interesting
and maintaining a lab-on-a-chip innovation chain. Research and development of the components of lab-on-a-chip continue,
Fig. 2. Broader innovation issues of the transition from research lab to company in the single cell analysis innovation chain. 524 D. K. R. Robinson,
This barrier will be explored later in the paper as the main gap in the innovation chain for the last 15 years,
Who will be the key actors in stimulating the innovation chain (noting the reluctance of larger industry to stimulate innovation chains)
and the lack of successful innovation chains meaning lab-on-a-chip remains at the research level,
and 3. evaluate which paths show the most promise of successfully bridging the gaps in the innovation chain for single cell analysis with lab-on-a-chip technology.
and (MPM-2) was used in an interactive way with practitioners as part of a workshop on bridging gaps in the innovation chain from the perspective of practitioners.
and the prospected innovation chains. Cell-on-a-chip development is at a very early stage;
such a multi-path-map would allow plotting of possible innovation chains and enable the network to constructively stimulate innovation chains stemming from its research choices.
Eventually, this allows targeting of research and the negotiation with various relevant innovation chain actors. For cell-on-a-chip
research areas are based around the perceived functions for cell handling and analysis conducted today in a macro-scale laboratory:(
and (6) Analysis. Relevant research for instrumentation and approaches for each of these stages is positioned in the proof of principle section (phase 1) of the innovation chain shown in Figs. 1 and 2. Such areas of research have proliferated over the last 10 years 53,54.
Aside from these relatively simple experimental integrations there is the same gap in the innovation chain which we have diagnosed in Section 3 a gap in innovation of full experimental integration and evolution into and integrated platform.
(or any) analysis. We come back to this in the next section where we look at specific innovation chains for cell-on-a-chip.
the existence of innovation chains around MCA linking actors in research, experimental integration, integration into platforms,
concerted and sustained interaction of actors in and around the innovation chains is necessary. The resulting first-round MPM shown in Fig. 3,
and (5) general time axis and stages of innovation chain. The actual MPM would show many more specific paths plotted within the clusters of MCA
and targeting the stimulation of innovation chains. This links up with management challenge 1 for Frontiers:
Innovation chains are specific and there is a lot at stake for those who attempt at creating (or becoming a part of) an innovation chain.
Looking at specifics of innovation chains addresses the management challenge 2, development and maintenance of science-toinduustr links through stimulation of innovation chains.
For the purpose of aiding development to strategic research area setting within Frontiers, this map (and any future evolution) is
The next step of our project was to focus more intently on the second management issue that of innovation chains. 5. MPM-2 innovation chain dynamics Referring to the two management challenges of Frontiers,
The second challenge for Frontiers, that of stimulation of relevant innovation chains, is the subject of this section.
MPM for various possible innovation chains requires insights from practitioners who have experience and something at stake in creating
and maintaining innovation chains. To this end we facilitated a practitioner strategy articulation workshop. The workshop focused on mapping possible innovation chains
and challenges for progressing down the number of possible options. The two aims of the workshop were:
in order to direct research and seek out possible actors who could co-construct an innovation chain based on the Strategic research Areas of Frontiers. 2. Broadening the perspectives of the practitioners participating in the exercise to test the robustness of MPM as part of a strategy support system
for prospecting innovation chains. Building off MPM-1, we conducted interviews based on perspectives and projections of the field of lab-on-a-chip for single cell applications.
(or attempts at) innovation chains in the broader microfluidic/cell analysis fields: In-house R&d of a multinational corporation (MNC) Technology development conducted by SMES
and technical challenges to be placed side by side with the goal of prospecting innovation chains. In this case we left the technical steps in the chain as part of the axis
Thus innovation chain 1 was said to have a key stumbling block no clear market is visible for return on investment and thus.
Identifying the end user is one clear approach to selecting the components and configurations of a technology innovation chain.
because the innovation chain is precarious and may collapse. Flexibility is attractive for developing sustainable innovation chains
but requires a belief in the technology. The participants agreed that this is lacking in MNCS due to previous hype-disappointment cycles such as in biosensors.
However, the large risk of little return-on-investment has stimulated another form of innovation chain initiated by MNCS shown in innovation chain 2. This shifts the risk to SMES which the MNC contracts for risky projects.
for example the sustenance of the innovation chain is wholly dependent on the whim of the MNC. Moreover the concern was raised about the protection of IP:
The group posed innovation chains 3 and 4 and explored these as ways of bypassing any MNC lack of interest in integration by new forms of innovation chain.
In innovation chain 3 a consortium of start-up companies would be the initiator for bridging the gap by attempting a generic integrated platform
which could then be tailored for specific applications. This proposal was based on a view from The netherlands: here similar SMES waiting for the integrated platform to arrive are struggling to survive
The workshop participants agreed that the attractiveness of this innovation chain would be tempered again by IP issues a large number of companies, distributed IP,
whether generic platform (rather than specific application tailored innovation chains) is the path to take. An alternative to this path was innovation chain 4
which focused on heterogeneous clusters. Since a large investment is needed in integration there are specific advantages to be gained by building on proximity relations.
The workshop participants pointed out that there are attempts at all four innovation chains. Innovation chain 1 has been attempted by large companies such as Siemens for relatively simple integrated microfluidics.
One participant mentioned a Lab-cow: an interesting integrated microfluidic device was designed first and then began the search for an application,
Innovation chain 2 has occurred with companies such as Glaxo-Smith-Kline19 and spin-offs such as those University of Hull (UK) and Yole Developpement,
a French MEMS business development consultancy. 20 There are attempts in The netherlands for innovation chain 3 building off micro
and nanotechnology SME networks such as Minacned. 21 Innovation chain 4 is currently occurring at the University of Twente (NL) where a start-up company with a specific sensor is acting as platform integrator.
Each of these innovation chains are possible but 3 and 4 were agreed to be the most plausible ways forward (based on past failures of innovation chains 1 and 2). The participants also raised more general issues
which came up as part of the exploration of innovation chains. A major point was distributed IP for development of an integrated platform,
the agreement being that new models need to be sought. For innovation chain 3 this is indeed a challenge.
For innovation 4 however this can be handled if there is one system integrator which targets a specific application
Although pressure is on them to provide research that can be turned into innovation chains, there is little acknowledgement of time spent on doing this as opposed to research
The outcome of the workshop was that innovation chain 4 is agreed to be the most promising approach to creating an integrated lab-on-a-chip platform.
Salient issues of the management of socio-technical aspects of this particular innovation chain were highlighted also.
then any of the innovation chains identified can create the matrix of entanglements constitutive of the new technology-application paradigm:
What specific kinds of innovation chains can be stimulated? What happens technologically, organizationally along the way and needs strategic rethinking?
The maps can be used to train programme officers/portfolio managers on anticipated issues along respective innovation chains,
what innovation chain to invest in, or which actor strategies of building up such chains to support.
This allowed discussion to go ahead on forms of innovation chain and ways of bridging 534 D. K. R. Robinson, T. Propp/Technological forecasting & Social Change 75 (2008) 517 538 the gaps.
This start-up company is attempting innovation chain 4 (heterogeneous clusters) based on an application oriented innovation chain where users are involved already in the design process.
if they can gain extra insights on organizational innovation chains (as well as the technology paths), and thus a tailoring of the tool for the start-up company is currently ongoing.
where he analyzes genetics/genomics based innovation chains and actor strategies in the converging zone of the food and health sectors. 538 D. K. R. Robinson, T. Propp/Technological forecasting & Social Change
ART24.pdf
the innovation chain+,and endogenous futures. This framework which can help in structuring large amounts of heterogeneous data,
which would combine path dynamics 26 28 with the sociology of expectations 29 to prospect micro-level innovation chains.
we have called sometimes it innovation chain plus (IC), +but it is actually a mosaic of arenas through
and framing conditions to be an explicit part of the mapping. 2. 2. Innovation chain+:+a mosaic of arenas for innovation and selection At the time of the Constructive TA project, a method of combining ideas of innovation journeys amidst evolving landscapes (coevollutio of innovation/selection processes
the Innovation chain+model was developed. 6 Whilst every innovation has its journey, it is dependent on the techno-institutional landscape.
I propose the Innovation chain+framework as a way of presenting this situation. It allows the positioning of the complexities inherent to the reality of innovations, paths and landscapes,
The Innovation chain+is designed for new product creation and thus is useful for locating and framing shifts within certain areas of the chain,
Robinson and Propp 6 used the innovation chain concept in the context of path dynamics. 7 Here I make a distinction.
In line with Innovation chain+nomenclature one could call this Innovation+.+8 Still the focus of technology developers in their FTA ACTIVITIES, focus on paths (such as roadmapping) rather than journeys.
& Social Change 76 (2009) 1222-1239 Fig. 1. Innovation chain+as a mosaic of co-evolving arenas of innovation and selection with innovation journeys showing coupling, shifting,
They do their job by emphasising tensions occurring in the Innovation chain+frame and place into context possible playings out,
years Aspects of translation through Innovation chain: Innovation journeys shift from gestation period to start-up phase. This section also illustrates techno start-up strategies..
These scenarios embrace complexity by referring to the emerging natures of both the innovation chains and their environment.
ART71.pdf
The presentattio aims to locate elements that would add value to the solar cell innovation chain (the y-axis)
ART84.pdf
innovation) and group phone discussion 3. New spatial distribution of innovation innovation chain management Anna Trifilova and Bettina von Stamm Professors, Innovation Management;
while new regions become more important in global innovation chains. 8) Systemic sustainability innovation: Innovation patterns fostering systemtransitions towards sustainability rather than isolated product development are required more andmore
ART9.pdf
and sustaining an innovation chain. The paper informs on the outcomes of a project on the simulation of alignment tools to allow the creation of innovation chains in the field of micro and nanotechnology.
It explains the development of a particular variation of a roadmapping technique, the so-called‘multi-path mapping'(MPM) toolset by exploring its prospects
Science.PublicPolicyVol39\2. Orienting European innovation systems towards grand challenges and the roles.pdf
KICS cover the entire innovation chain, and bring together partners from research, business and academia to work together on major societal challenges.
< Back - Next >
Overtext Web Module V3.0 Alpha
Copyright Semantic-Knowledge, 1994-2011
